|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
gng930
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11355
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | Rob traded for Mo right...knowing that he could cost them 10.3m the following year if retained.
Anyways, I wanted to retain Mo to see mo run with AD...you know, at least have a look at it, before pulling the plug. If he didn't work out, we cut him and his proration would have paid him about 5m. Again, these taxes added to his salary, isn't based entirely on his salary alone, no matter how much you want to inflate their cost.
My point remains that all we have is Hayes on the vet min to help shoulder the load for AD at the C for the remainder of the season.
If that was the plan set forth by our GM..it wasn't a very good one imho. |
I'm making a real effort to forget that we ever had Bamba. The simple reason is that the dynamic he could have possibly added along side AD would have been intriguing.
It was worth trying for at least a year, even at 10mil. Or, as the market has shown, bring him back for half that on a two year contract with the second year a team option.
Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go..
The very best outcome for his reconstructed roster would have been to add both Hayes & Bamba. THAT would have had me seriously more excited than I am about the currently constructed roster. |
If he means what he said...I think he would prefer two bigs on the floor that have shown they can actually be in a regular rotation. It's also notable that we had Mcgee/Dwight/Boogie altogether making less than Mo's option would have been.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5420
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
@G: The thing is, we’re not rehashing a discussion that is months old. I’ve had this exchange with the same parties for the better part of 2 weeks. The second AD agreed to an extension insinuating that he was our endgame from the jump, then protecting that investment should have been done in alignment with his projected presence here. Imho that would be consider a good business model. I have said as much in different variations repeatedly to the same individuals…so yeah, I’ve grown tired in not only giving possible options/solutions, but stating the same thing over and over again. Scrub thru the last several pages in this thread and I ain’t embellishing. I’ve repeatedly given the same options/examples, the same player/GM quotes…the same premise! Protect your AD investment, especially after trading what we did for him and now handing him back to back pseudo 5yr deals.
It really can’t be disputed that as he goes, so do our title hopes. It also can’t be disputed that he is our ADvantage in being a defensive powerhouse in this league. It can’t be disputed that he is coming back from a stress rxn injury and he is now 4 years older than when we first traded for him. The durability issue is tangible and we have not really taken a proactive course in correcting that narrative in his biography. Rather, we have been the authors to that book…which is the only contribution we have made in making him a foreword 😜
Everybody has a hard-on to make this dude a 5. Well what exactly has that led to these past couple years? Maybe we should come to terms that placing him in that position is hard on him and deviating from this stance us something we should be more sincere in looking into. You want to do something about his ability to remain on the floor, then do more than Hayes and possibly a defensive inept Woods.
We haven’t seen a single minute of Mo & AD, so it’s premature to throw dirt on that scenario…especially after trading for him last year to see if that was a solution. Instead he came here coming off a suspension…got no run with AD as dude was coming back from his injury…and in the ramp up to making a postseason bid, we never explored that possibility and couldn’t later come back to reassess it since the postseason had already started and Mo then suffered his own injury which he was rehabbing from.
I wouldn’t consider Orlando making him an afterthought the definitive nail in the coffin to his career…cause what exactly has Orlando’s decision making brought them in terms of success lately.
Had we moved his guarantee trigger date, he would have been a prorated 5m once waived & a prorated 1m on vet min re-up. That would still allow the flexibility to approach the buyout market and it would also allow us to be better suited to salary match based on how much was necessary to guarantee upon a possible trade. A team is trading for Prince and his nonbird rights, why? Jut like Mo, he would have been a flight rush for that trading partner. Unlike Mo tho, he wouldn’t be carrying early bird rights that. At have impacted his retention for his new team.
And once again, I repeat that the reason none of those options were explored further was due to the tax. And imho, that’s a terrible reason to conduct business if the objective is to solidify your positioning (pun intended) in competing for a title.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gng930
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11355
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
As you noted, we do seem to just be rehashing at this point (at least between you and me). I will rehash one last point though that doesn't pertain to cap gymnastics. There is more nuance when it comes to stress injuries. Physical pounding against centers within a game doesn't contribute to them as much as you are implying. Upper body injuries you can certainly make a case for. Stress injuries to the foot relate more to minutes played and distance traveled within a game. That's why you often see him not even setting up for FT rebounds. And that's why they had him sitting out B2Bs; rest is crucial in prevention. No center you sign is going to change the minutes bar that we generally set for AD (30-35 minutes/game for 50-60 games) nor should we set that bar lower if we are serious about contending. But if you're also going to shoe-horn him more into the wing-defender role you've been advocating, that certainly will contribute to additional stress injuries to his foot.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31693
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58095
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Match ups wise, where we probably would struggle is when teams have a physical low post threat scoring 5 combined with a guard that can go off. The Warriors for example have the guards but not the bigs. They don't scare me at all. Neither really the Kings. Their bigs won't punish AD for leaving to go help on screens or having to switch.
The Suns have the combination to hurt us, but lack depth. They would on paper be a tough match up, as they have the guards that can go off with a big guy in the middle who is a threat and needs to be accounted for by AD. I find teams that can make AD and Lebron work, are the teams we will have issues with. So with Ayton/Durant, they should be making our best players work on D, and then they have weapons at PG/SG to go off in screen/roll action with those players. One of the things we do with AD is we have him both use drop coverage and show on screens. However when he shows and even switches, if the oppponent has a big guy that can score inside, we don't really do that or likely abandon it quick when the opposing big guy is feasting inside on smalls.
Thus, leaving us prone to having issues with outside shooting ballhandling guards (why Murray went off). This is big part of why we beat the Warriors in 6, but had issues with Denver and lost in 4.
Denver, obvious, no explaining. Like the Suns though, I question their depth as of today. They lost Brown unreplaced. How much hunger do they have to repeat as well. Repeats are rare. Doubt they'll be the same level next year.
The Clippers if they are ever healthy, that's a big if, they also have the matchups to make it a tough situation for us. Westbrook probably plays to our advantage as he's like a non-shooting Center for us, but a healty Kawhi/PG and their other pieces (bigs like Zubac/Plumlee) will make us work with AD/Bron. You hope they make a bad Harden trade ....
Outside of those teams - we're easily the 4th best team in the West for the playoffs with what we have. And we know the Clips are rarely healthy, with the Suns/Nuggets having depth issues, Suns may have chemistry issues with Beal/KD/Ayton/Booker.
With all that said, I think the fact that we have a roster without an impact 5, and a defensive 2 and are still positioned well enough to make a run, shows you how weak the West is. We should be aiming to add those pieces by trade deadline. Big question is tax. I wonder if we just take our chances as is, seeing that on paper we're a top 4 West team. Pelinka had the opportunity to make some significant progress towards advancing past where he left of. However it seems he's hoping that better chemistry and some young player development will lead to a title vs getting proven help in those roles.
Pelinka needed to work a bit to get more help at the 5 and 2, but maybe it just wasn't available for what he had. Or perhaps he has more faith in certain players than we do. We'll find out as the season progresses. He certainly valued Vincent's game more than I would. And he speaks of Hayes in a way where you'd think he's a former elite defensive big. Those 2 spots are the ones I really focused on, because that's where I felt we needed the most help to get over the top. Perhaps I'm wrong, and the 5 and 2 spots are not where we needed the most help. Maybe we needed the extra 4s/big wings and additional PG to DLO/Reaves more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37004
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't. |
To put this into further context, Rob said all this stuff about Jaxson after he signed him. Of course, at that point he is going to declare how great he is and how he fits perfectly into whatever the Lakers wanted to. That's what GMs do. They are hyping the team and patting themselves on the back for the great signing they made.
It's funny how some people take the things that GMs spout in interviews as if they are secret documents giving the true insight on the team's strategy. I just look at this kind of statement as PR. He would have said the same kind of thing about any player he signed. I consider it virtually meaningless myself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5420
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@G
| Quote: | According to the literature, an overwhelming amount of these injuries are seen in short-distance runners and basketball players. Navicular stress fractures are more likely in these subgroups because these athletes do a lot of jumping, rapid cutting, and explosive movements; they frequently engage in forceful push off, with frequent and repetitive loading of the forefoot.
The navicular serves as an integral structural link between the midfoot and the hindfoot, allowing for force transmission and push off during gait. Moreover, the navicular provides stability to the longitudinal and transverse arches of the foot and is considered the keystone of the medial longitudinal arch.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5344863/
|
| Quote: | In the NBA, stress fractures have gotten a bad name because of the problems they have caused for some of the league’s best players, particularly centers. Yao Ming had his career ended by consecutive stress fractures to his navicular bone, while Bill Walton‘s career was altered by a string of stress fractures to both feet. However, they are far more common than you may expect, and many players who suffer stress fractures have no issues after the fact.
Bigger players suffered the most injuries, nearly twice as many as any other position group. This makes sense, as the more height and weight a player carries around, the more force is going to be received by the body. As far as injury type, stress fractures by far most commonly affected the feet, with lower leg fractures coming in second. The lower leg also had the highest incidence of stress reactions caught before fractures formed, with 5 of the 14 cases being reactions.
https://hoopshabit.com/2014/06/23/serious-stress-fractures-nba-players/
|
| Quote: | Davis detailed the complex injury he is dealing with. A bone spur fractured off the navicular bone in his right foot. That same navicular bone -- which is located at the top of the foot between the ankle and the toes -- has a stress reaction which first appeared in a game against the Denver Nuggets on Dec. 16 when his right leg collided with Nikola Jokic in the paint.
|
Now I know there is repeated, explosive cutting involved in defensive slides out on the wings, but think about the repetitive load up of the forefoot into the midfoot when it comes to leaning on big bodied centers. Then rapidly exploding off that planted foot to challenge the shot followed by a rapid burst to secure the defensive rebound. Imho rim protecting seems to be far more impactful towards the biodynamics involving the navicular bone in the midfoot, rather than the mechanics in defensive slides out on the wings. If he’s tasked to guard a player in constant motion out there like Steph, then I can understand the reservation in having him play out there. But the weight bearing stress of bodying up a big, while constant rim protection & defensive board work seem to be more the element at play. Pair that having him bulk up and adding weight to handle the load rather than cutting weight to gain mobility & speed out on the wing and I hope you can understand my position better (pun intended) on this topic.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gng930
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11355
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think there's anything from what you quoted that would implicate repetitive vertical, as opposed to lateral, exertion. Bigger players are affected more because the 3-dimensional load they carry is more disproportionate to the 2-dimensional surface area of their feet. And it's more complex than where your foot happens to be leaning.
| Quote: |
The tarsal navicular acts as a keystone for the medial column and longitudinal arch of the foot (figure 1). It articulates with the talus proximally, the cuboid medially, and the medial, intermediate, and lateral cuneiforms distally. Strong ligamentous connections unite the five bones that form the mid-tarsal complex (navicular, cuboid, and cuneiforms) (figure 2 and figure 3 and figure 4). Several clinically important ligaments attach to the navicular, including: the posterior tibialis tendon, which inserts on the navicular tuberosity; a portion of the deltoid ligament, which inserts on the anterior body; and the plantar calcaneonavicular (or, "spring") ligament, which originates at the sustentaculum tali of the calcaneus and inserts along the medial and plantar aspects of the navicular. Dorsal and plantar cuneonavicular and cuboideonavicular ligaments provide further support.
The biomechanical role and vascular anatomy of the tarsal navicular combine to make it highly susceptible to stress fracture [17]. During running, compressive forces on the navicular create a zone of maximum shear stress in the central third of the navicular body, particularly during the foot-strike phase of gait [2]. The navicular receives its blood supply from branches of the dorsalis pedis artery dorsi-laterally and branches of the tibialis posterior artery along its plantar and medial aspects. This perfusion network is robust along the periphery of the navicular but creates a relatively avascular "watershed" region in the central third of the bone in some patients, increasing the risk for stress-related injury and delayed healing. However, the frequency and role of relative avascularity in the development of navicular stress injury is debated [18]. The combination of high biomechanical stress and vascular watershed creates a region in the central navicular that is susceptible to injury, and this is in fact where the majority of stress fractures develop.
Running gait can be altered by limitations in joint mobility, which can in turn increase the stress placed on particular structures. While evidence is limited, some researchers think that reduced mobility at the ankle (eg, limited dorsiflexion) and subtalar joints may increase the stresses placed upon the navicular during running [16,19].
|
Sorry I don't have a link. It's not a resource available to the general public  . I can tell you though that "run" is mentioned 30 times in the article while "jump" is once. I can also give you the citation for the area in bold:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22382289/
I would also think you use your hindfoot more to defend in the post. Even if you implicate jumping, is it more stress on the foot to stop on a dime and contest a jump-shot after chasing a perimeter player at full speed or moreso to contest one coming from more of a stand-still position in the post? Disclaimer though, I'm not a biomechanical expert, especially when it comes to the foot. But you can probably imagine where I'm leaning.
Since they do cite short-distance runners, I wonder if hurdlers, for instance, are more susceptible than sprinters. I couldn't find much data on that.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5420
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Non-scientific take: but, but, whatever repetitive motions he was going through over the last couple years is what precipitated the injury, right? And what position did he repeatedly over these last couple years?
It’s repetitive, high impact biodynamics that lead to a an impingement if the navicular bone leading to a stress fracture. He had a bone spur that fractured off in that region as well, so it was definitely some elements of improper bone resorption due to repeated stress in that area of his foot.
Overpronation comes to mind and that’s where the foot at the ankle bends outward laterally while excessive weight bearing forces are applied medially. The biodynamics involved in that type of motion are sudden cuts made in change of direction motions (see cutting suddenly off a screen toward a rim run looking for the lob on a pick-n-roll on offense or playing weakside & falling asleep ball watching, but then making a sudden cut to find your man who slipped to the cup on defense), as well as planting one’s foot and standing flat footed bearing the weight of an external force (see bodying a post presence in the paint), as well as jumping and more importantly, landing in order to not roll your ankle (aka oversupination).
When it comes to AD’s running gait, here are the stats from last season for the distance he travels per game and at the velocity he travels at…needless to say, nothing really stands out.
Interestingly enough, for the 2021/22 season, he did travel the 2nd most distance per on defense in comparison to his other center cohorts.
But still, I believe the high incidence in navicular fractures that comes from sprinting, distance running & hurdling is due to the repetitive high impact motion that those type of athletes demonstrate. Sprinters run at high impact velocity during those races, which isn’t really comparable to what ball players really do on a nightly basis and in-season training. Long distance running, is much lower impact, but that repetitive nature is obviously for a much longer distance/duration. As for hurdlers, obviously they are the most synonymous with basketball players, but again I believe it’s the repetitive high impact landings (and not the manner in which they jump) that are most likely precipitates a stress injury. That’s where I’m looking at rim protection and feet entanglements upon landing as the main culprit. Then he likely goes right back up immediately after the attempted block shot, to then secure the defensive board.
And here are the stats to his drebs where he led the league in contested drebs (ie fighting other bigs for the board) and was second only to the Joker in the number of drebs he avg per.
Anyways all that is my roundabout way of saying, whatever the F he was doing these past couple years is what precipitated the injury. So he should probably position himself to limit those type of movements if possible. 😬
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58095
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know it's offseason talk, but AD does seem to have added a lot of muscle. It seems he's not the lean mean athletic machine he was 4 years ago. Right now, I'm not even sure he's on the same page as he was years ago, where he was definitely more of a 4/5 than he is today. I recall watching AD the first time as a Laker and thought, man that's the most athletic 7'0 forward I've ever seen.
Now when I see him, I don't see that. I think while Pelinka said all this, the roster is still heavily built around 4s like Rui, Vandy, Prince (can play some 3) with Lebron in there as well.
No matter how much we argue it, in the end, AD will be logging in at least 30 mpg at the 5. They may experiment with Hayes and AD, however it won't be a go to tactic like we saw with the 2019-20 regular season.
Whether this actually is in AD's best interests, it's debatable. On one hand you look at the team success of that 19-20 season. At the same time, as I said, it was 4 years ago. A lot of has changed since. We've got Lebron no longer playing PG. We don't have a Caruso level on the ball defender at guard. We don't even have a KCP/Danny Green level combo defensively at the 2/3 (or 1/2). It's a tough situation to replicate.
For now, the best lineup to me definitely seems to be AD/Bron/Rui - with Rui/AD/Bron taking turns at the 5 depending on match ups.
To me the bigger question is whether Reaves/DLO/Gabe/Christie is good enough at PG/SG. I don't know if Pelinka spent the MLE wisely. We'll see. He took a chance on Christie developing into a 15 ppg level scorer (given minutes). And Gabe to transition from Miami program to LA. He's also betting on Reaves sustaining his level, and DLO/Reaves to be core players (even though defensively they're not that good together). I feel all this talk about AD's position hides the real issue with our roster. We could probably get away with the lineups we have with AD at the 5 with all the support we have around him (Bron, Rui, Vandy, Prince etc). However in comparing the 19-20 and current team, I don't think we have remotely close to the same level perimeter defenders like Caruso, KCP, Green. The fact that our perimeter defenders were that good, made the jobs of our bigs that much easier. This current team isn't likely to be able to stop the ball and stick to their man defensively as well as those teams on the perimeter. When you talk KCP, Caruso heck even Bradley, you're talking guys that would fight like mad on defense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31693
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | | To me the bigger question is whether Reaves/DLO/Gabe/Christie is good enough at PG/SG. I don't know if Pelinka spent the MLE wisely. We'll see. He took a chance on Christie developing into a 15 ppg level scorer (given minutes). And Gabe to transition from Miami program to LA. He's also betting on Reaves sustaining his level, and DLO/Reaves to be core players (even though defensively they're not that good together). I feel all this talk about AD's position hides the real issue with our roster. We could probably get away with the lineups we have with AD at the 5 with all the support we have around him (Bron, Rui, Vandy, Prince etc). However in comparing the 19-20 and current team, I don't think we have remotely close to the same level perimeter defenders like Caruso, KCP, Green. The fact that our perimeter defenders were that good, made the jobs of our bigs that much easier. This current team isn't likely to be able to stop the ball and stick to their man defensively as well as those teams on the perimeter. When you talk KCP, Caruso heck even Bradley, you're talking guys that would fight like mad on defense. |
I share some of these concerns. Mostly, I'm concerned that we may have overvalued Vincent based on the perception from the Heat's playoff run. He was better in the playoffs than in the regular season, but you never know whether this is a trend or a small sample size. We need to hope that it's a trend. He should be at least a modest defensive upgrade over Schroder, and that's a positive. On the offensive end, though, he was strikingly inconsistent in both the regular season and the playoffs. Here are his game logs from last season. If this is what we get this season, we could have issues at guard on the nights when Vincent is switched off. Also, note that Vincent has a career .334 average from three.
We may look back on this and say that Pelinka nailed this one. Let's hope so. Otherwise, I'm concerned about the depth at guard. Russell and Reaves should be fine. Vincent may be okay, despite my concerns. Christie looked good in the summer league, and he may be able to provide some quality minutes. But then we're looking at JHS, who did not look ready in the summer league. If any of the veterans get hurt -- even an injury in the 3-4 week range -- we've got an issue. I would rather have seen a veteran combo guard than a project like Reddish. Maybe we will look back and say that Pelinka nailed it by signing Reddish. Still, we've gone from a guard heavy roster to a forward heavy roster. It doesn't look balanced.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4483
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't. |
I read the full quote. I see it as both strategy & gm speak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 28152
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't mind the guard rotation. Reaves and DLO have solid chemistry. I'm happy we get to see that develop further.
I will say. Team USA has shown me. Reaves may be that type of guy with most players.
| Quote: | “… Just feel, vision, awareness, and understanding of the game,” said Kerr of what makes Reaves a “connector.” “The ball just goes to the right spot, the right cut is made. Austin made a play yesterday where he made a drive and kick; he was kind of behind the defense, and he worked completely behind the defense, flashed kind of in the middle of the paint, caught it and swung it through. He had feel; you have to have awareness to make a play like that. So connectors are guys who make those types of plays, and the game just makes sense, and you end up getting open shots.”
|
_________________
"I knew I was fly when I was just a caterpillar." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4483
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't. |
To put this into further context, Rob said all this stuff about Jaxson after he signed him. Of course, at that point he is going to declare how great he is and how he fits perfectly into whatever the Lakers wanted to. That's what GMs do. They are hyping the team and patting themselves on the back for the great signing they made.
It's funny how some people take the things that GMs spout in interviews as if they are secret documents giving the true insight on the team's strategy. I just look at this kind of statement as PR. He would have said the same kind of thing about any player he signed. I consider it virtually meaningless myself. |
Well, "some people" can be just as correct as you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4483
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gng930 wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | Rob traded for Mo right...knowing that he could cost them 10.3m the following year if retained.
Anyways, I wanted to retain Mo to see mo run with AD...you know, at least have a look at it, before pulling the plug. If he didn't work out, we cut him and his proration would have paid him about 5m. Again, these taxes added to his salary, isn't based entirely on his salary alone, no matter how much you want to inflate their cost.
My point remains that all we have is Hayes on the vet min to help shoulder the load for AD at the C for the remainder of the season.
If that was the plan set forth by our GM..it wasn't a very good one imho. |
I'm making a real effort to forget that we ever had Bamba. The simple reason is that the dynamic he could have possibly added along side AD would have been intriguing.
It was worth trying for at least a year, even at 10mil. Or, as the market has shown, bring him back for half that on a two year contract with the second year a team option.
Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go..
The very best outcome for his reconstructed roster would have been to add both Hayes & Bamba. THAT would have had me seriously more excited than I am about the currently constructed roster. |
If he means what he said...I think he would prefer two bigs on the floor that have shown they can actually be in a regular rotation. It's also notable that we had Mcgee/Dwight/Boogie altogether making less than Mo's option would have been. |
How can they actually be in a regular rotation if they never had a chance to do so? That is the only point I've made. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37004
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't. |
To put this into further context, Rob said all this stuff about Jaxson after he signed him. Of course, at that point he is going to declare how great he is and how he fits perfectly into whatever the Lakers wanted to. That's what GMs do. They are hyping the team and patting themselves on the back for the great signing they made.
It's funny how some people take the things that GMs spout in interviews as if they are secret documents giving the true insight on the team's strategy. I just look at this kind of statement as PR. He would have said the same kind of thing about any player he signed. I consider it virtually meaningless myself. |
Well, "some people" can be just as correct as you. |
If someone wants to believe that everything a GM tells the press is the unadulterated truth from their soul, that's their business I just don't believe that myself. So, yeah, I do tend to roll my eyes when people bring up some quote a person made months or years ago and act as if it is a legal promissory note.
Actually, the funny thing is that people are often not even quoting the person himself. They are quoting a blogger who is rewriting another blogger who was rewriting someone's original report, and thinking the result of all that paraphrasing is a promissory note |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gng930
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11355
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vasashi17+ wrote: | Non-scientific take: but, but, whatever repetitive motions he was going through over the last couple years is what precipitated the injury, right? And what position did he repeatedly over these last couple years?
It’s repetitive, high impact biodynamics that lead to a an impingement if the navicular bone leading to a stress fracture. He had a bone spur that fractured off in that region as well, so it was definitely some elements of improper bone resorption due to repeated stress in that area of his foot.
Overpronation comes to mind and that’s where the foot at the ankle bends outward laterally while excessive weight bearing forces are applied medially. The biodynamics involved in that type of motion are sudden cuts made in change of direction motions (see cutting suddenly off a screen toward a rim run looking for the lob on a pick-n-roll on offense or playing weakside & falling asleep ball watching, but then making a sudden cut to find your man who slipped to the cup on defense), as well as planting one’s foot and standing flat footed bearing the weight of an external force (see bodying a post presence in the paint), as well as jumping and more importantly, landing in order to not roll your ankle (aka oversupination).
When it comes to AD’s running gait, here are the stats from last season for the distance he travels per game and at the velocity he travels at…needless to say, nothing really stands out.
Interestingly enough, for the 2021/22 season, he did travel the 2nd most distance per on defense in comparison to his other center cohorts.
But still, I believe the high incidence in navicular fractures that comes from sprinting, distance running & hurdling is due to the repetitive high impact motion that those type of athletes demonstrate. Sprinters run at high impact velocity during those races, which isn’t really comparable to what ball players really do on a nightly basis and in-season training. Long distance running, is much lower impact, but that repetitive nature is obviously for a much longer distance/duration. As for hurdlers, obviously they are the most synonymous with basketball players, but again I believe it’s the repetitive high impact landings (and not the manner in which they jump) that are most likely precipitates a stress injury. That’s where I’m looking at rim protection and feet entanglements upon landing as the main culprit. Then he likely goes right back up immediately after the attempted block shot, to then secure the defensive board.
And here are the stats to his drebs where he led the league in contested drebs (ie fighting other bigs for the board) and was second only to the Joker in the number of drebs he avg per.
Anyways all that is my roundabout way of saying, whatever the F he was doing these past couple years is what precipitated the injury. So he should probably position himself to limit those type of movements if possible. 😬 |
I think it's also possible that you are seeing it from him lately because he's getting older and accumulating mileage. Rest helps but it's not like the off-season resets that stress counter. In addition, there was some speculation from the doctors that the bone spur has been present since college based on some of its characteristics. If he really does have a predisposition for some reason, it's less important how many miles he travels relative to his peers and more so how many he travels moving forward. Although it is notable that he didn't seem to travel significantly more miles in the championship year he wasn't consistently tasked to defend wings.
I would imagine that jumping in traffic and avoiding awkward landings lends itself more to ankle/knee injuries than foot (specifically navicular) stress reactions. The key to stress injuries is not just repetitive but location-specific trauma. The variability by which you can jump and land is much more than by which you run forward.
Ultimately without having a formal degree in bio-mechanics or being a orthopedist/podiatrist, I won't claim to be an expert that can make a fully accurate assessment of your proposed bio-mechanism. Instead, I tend to be evidence-based.
Volleyball players, for instance, may have a tendency to develop stress fractures but they are not specific to the navicular bone as much as it is for runners. Same with dancers who develop stress fractures of any of the bones of the feet but again, not specific to the navicular bone.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8673581/
In terms of pushing off against big men, you might also consider wrestling and rugby (due to scrumming). From what I gather wrestlers are not at notably increased risk for navicular stress injuries. And as you noted, it's the landing impact and not the propelling motion that contributes to these injuries. The incidence in rugby players is not insignificant but that's largely confounding by the high amount of running/sprinting they also do. It should be noted that it is emerging in soccer players although the evidence remains inconsistent.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Last edited by gng930 on Sun Aug 20, 2023 8:14 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gng930
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11355
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | gng930 wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | Rob traded for Mo right...knowing that he could cost them 10.3m the following year if retained.
Anyways, I wanted to retain Mo to see mo run with AD...you know, at least have a look at it, before pulling the plug. If he didn't work out, we cut him and his proration would have paid him about 5m. Again, these taxes added to his salary, isn't based entirely on his salary alone, no matter how much you want to inflate their cost.
My point remains that all we have is Hayes on the vet min to help shoulder the load for AD at the C for the remainder of the season.
If that was the plan set forth by our GM..it wasn't a very good one imho. |
I'm making a real effort to forget that we ever had Bamba. The simple reason is that the dynamic he could have possibly added along side AD would have been intriguing.
It was worth trying for at least a year, even at 10mil. Or, as the market has shown, bring him back for half that on a two year contract with the second year a team option.
Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go..
The very best outcome for his reconstructed roster would have been to add both Hayes & Bamba. THAT would have had me seriously more excited than I am about the currently constructed roster. |
If he means what he said...I think he would prefer two bigs on the floor that have shown they can actually be in a regular rotation. It's also notable that we had Mcgee/Dwight/Boogie altogether making less than Mo's option would have been. |
How can they actually be in a regular rotation if they never had a chance to do so? That is the only point I've made. |
Why do you think he never had the chance to even when he was healthy?
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31693
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | Actually, the funny thing is that people are often not even quoting the person himself. They are quoting a blogger who is rewriting another blogger who was rewriting someone's original report, and thinking the result of all that paraphrasing is a promissory note |
Yep. The relevant quote is "Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player." So they talked about it "a little bit." Okay. Maybe this really is the plan, or at least maybe they plan to do this some. We shall see.
Just the same, it strikes me as unlikely that this is going to be a regular configuration. Lebron is four years older. If we have Hayes at the 5 and Davis at the 4, Lebron matches up against perimeter players and our SF depth sits on the bench.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4483
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't. |
To put this into further context, Rob said all this stuff about Jaxson after he signed him. Of course, at that point he is going to declare how great he is and how he fits perfectly into whatever the Lakers wanted to. That's what GMs do. They are hyping the team and patting themselves on the back for the great signing they made.
It's funny how some people take the things that GMs spout in interviews as if they are secret documents giving the true insight on the team's strategy. I just look at this kind of statement as PR. He would have said the same kind of thing about any player he signed. I consider it virtually meaningless myself. |
Well, "some people" can be just as correct as you. |
If someone wants to believe that everything a GM tells the press is the unadulterated truth from their soul, that's their business I just don't believe that myself. So, yeah, I do tend to roll my eyes when people bring up some quote a person made months or years ago and act as if it is a legal promissory note.
Actually, the funny thing is that people are often not even quoting the person himself. They are quoting a blogger who is rewriting another blogger who was rewriting someone's original report, and thinking the result of all that paraphrasing is a promissory note |
The question is whether we'll be able to have a two-big model that works effectively w/Hayes & AD.
I have nothing more to add because it veers too far away from the topic at hand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 143614
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go.. |
That isn't exactly what Pelinka said, though a number of bloggers spun it that way. Here's the full quote, talking about Jaxson Hayes:
| Quote: | “I remember scouting him when he was at Texas, obviously his dad was an NFL player, and so he has a toughness and an aggression to his game. Coach Ham and I talked a little bit with Anthony (Davis) about going back to the model we had in 2020 when we won a championship where we had guys like Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee playing alongside of AD, and we identified early in the free agent process for us is that Jaxson is that type of player.
“He’s a big kid, rim protector, plays with a high level of energy and he’s also a really good screen setter, so when you have guards like D’Angelo Russell that really want to operate in the pick-and-roll and have Austin Reaves as a secondary ballhandler, we thought Jaxson would be a good fit with those guys with the way he plays.” |
I see people treating this like a declaration of strategy, when it's probably just GM speak. More importantly, if you take it literally, he's saying that Jaxson Hayes is the kind of player that they were looking for, which implies that Bamba wasn't. |
I read the full quote. I see it as both strategy & gm speak. |
Oh it is GM speak and the more questionable the signing, the more bragging and patting himself on the back. I follow the Pelicans closely and Hayes definitely has some talent but I’m not convinced that it extends from the neck upwards.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 143614
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | If we have Hayes at the 5 and Davis at the 4, Lebron matches up against perimeter players and our SF depth sits on the bench. |
That’s it in a nutshell regarding why AD will spend significant time at center, almost 40 yo Lebron shouldn’t be chasing more athletic and younger SFs on the perimeter. Maybe for the 20 or so games that Lebron misses you experiment but when healthy a lineup of DLO, Reaves, SF, Lebron and AD makes sense for this roster. At SF you can go offensively with Prince or defensively with Vanderbilt.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37004
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: |
The question is whether we'll be able to have a two-big model that works effectively w/Hayes & AD. . |
For me, the question is even one step before that: What does "talking a little bit" about "going back to the model we had in 2020" mean, if it actually means anything at all?
Beats me. I could see it mean anything from "We hope to start Hayes at center and have him play 20 minutes a game there" to "We plan to play Hayes and AD together on occasion" to "Hey, I'm just talking for the sake of talking because there's a microphone in my face; the coach will make the lineup decisions, not me." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4483
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gng930 wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | gng930 wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | Rob traded for Mo right...knowing that he could cost them 10.3m the following year if retained.
Anyways, I wanted to retain Mo to see mo run with AD...you know, at least have a look at it, before pulling the plug. If he didn't work out, we cut him and his proration would have paid him about 5m. Again, these taxes added to his salary, isn't based entirely on his salary alone, no matter how much you want to inflate their cost.
My point remains that all we have is Hayes on the vet min to help shoulder the load for AD at the C for the remainder of the season.
If that was the plan set forth by our GM..it wasn't a very good one imho. |
I'm making a real effort to forget that we ever had Bamba. The simple reason is that the dynamic he could have possibly added along side AD would have been intriguing.
It was worth trying for at least a year, even at 10mil. Or, as the market has shown, bring him back for half that on a two year contract with the second year a team option.
Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go..
The very best outcome for his reconstructed roster would have been to add both Hayes & Bamba. THAT would have had me seriously more excited than I am about the currently constructed roster. |
If he means what he said...I think he would prefer two bigs on the floor that have shown they can actually be in a regular rotation. It's also notable that we had Mcgee/Dwight/Boogie altogether making less than Mo's option would have been. |
How can they actually be in a regular rotation if they never had a chance to do so? That is the only point I've made. |
Why do you think he never had the chance to even when he was healthy? |
I could be soooo wrong, but it seems like Ham just wasn't impressed enough with him to give him a serious look. This was a young, 7'2 center, who shot 38% from the three and long enough to provide some serious deterrent at the rim, etc.,
I remember he got hurt, and that surely affected things. I think at least some of us were really excited at the possibilities that he would bring. But, again, it seems like Ham, unlike what I heard about Rob, wasn't very impressed with him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 52443
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2023 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | gng930 wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | gng930 wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | Rob traded for Mo right...knowing that he could cost them 10.3m the following year if retained.
Anyways, I wanted to retain Mo to see mo run with AD...you know, at least have a look at it, before pulling the plug. If he didn't work out, we cut him and his proration would have paid him about 5m. Again, these taxes added to his salary, isn't based entirely on his salary alone, no matter how much you want to inflate their cost.
My point remains that all we have is Hayes on the vet min to help shoulder the load for AD at the C for the remainder of the season.
If that was the plan set forth by our GM..it wasn't a very good one imho. |
I'm making a real effort to forget that we ever had Bamba. The simple reason is that the dynamic he could have possibly added along side AD would have been intriguing.
It was worth trying for at least a year, even at 10mil. Or, as the market has shown, bring him back for half that on a two year contract with the second year a team option.
Here's what I don't really understand: Pelinka said he wanted to get back to the championship model. You had a 7'2 stretch the floor big who could help building that model. And then you let him go..
The very best outcome for his reconstructed roster would have been to add both Hayes & Bamba. THAT would have had me seriously more excited than I am about the currently constructed roster. |
If he means what he said...I think he would prefer two bigs on the floor that have shown they can actually be in a regular rotation. It's also notable that we had Mcgee/Dwight/Boogie altogether making less than Mo's option would have been. |
How can they actually be in a regular rotation if they never had a chance to do so? That is the only point I've made. |
Why do you think he never had the chance to even when he was healthy? |
I could be soooo wrong, but it seems like Ham just wasn't impressed enough with him to give him a serious look. This was a young, 7'2 center, who shot 38% from the three and long enough to provide some serious deterrent at the rim, etc.,
I remember he got hurt, and that surely affected things. I think at least some of us were really excited at the possibilities that he would bring. But, again, it seems like Ham, unlike what I heard about Rob, wasn't very impressed with him. |
Maybe there’s a reason nobody that has him seems to be impressed? I was excited about him too and when you look at some of the stats it was intriguing. Good percentage from 3? Blocks shots? Giant wingspan? It sounds great until you watch him play. I know it was a small sample here but he looked absolutely clueless out there, which was a stark contrast to the other new additions who just fit in right away. He’s too slow to guard quicker guys and too skinny to guard bigger guys. Unless he’s going off from 3, and he just isn’t that guy, he’s not effective. I’m guessing there was also some off the court stuff the team didn’t like. Keep in mind, he not only has been dumped by Orlando and LA, but he also didn’t have really any suitors in FA. He took a 1yr min deal from a team where his PT was going to be in serious question. If he doesn’t show out in Philly this year he could very well find himself out of the league.
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
