Lakers: Damn, we have been reduced to this ...

[140]

Wish you guys the best of luck, if it's not Simmons or Ingram the Lakers should trade it away IMO. Missing out on the Top 3 though will be a huge blow.

"Clippers fan"

[ambchang]

I am not entirely sure if the Lakers fan learned anything from Dirk, Curry and Durant, and it's that you don't need the #1 pick for the best player in the draft. Sure having the #1 pick helps, but with proper management, the right training, fitting a talent within a system, getting the right system, and acquiring the right team, you don't need the #1 pick to be a le contender.

Which is the bigger problem for the Lakers.

[DMC]

"Clippers fan"

[DMC]

I am not entirely sure if the Lakers fan learned anything from Dirk, Curry and Durant, and it's that you don't need the #1 pick for the best player in the draft. Sure having the #1 pick helps, but with proper management, the right training, fitting a talent within a system, getting the right system, and acquiring the right team, you don't need the #1 pick to be a le contender.

Which is the bigger problem for the Lakers.

Having the 1st overall pick gives you a better chance of getting the player you want, and trading the 1st overall is exponentially better than trading the 2nd overall. If you can make a good pick at 2 or lower, you can make the same pick at 1. You always want 1.

[ambchang]

Having the 1st overall pick gives you a better chance of getting the player you want, and trading the 1st overall is exponentially better than trading the 2nd overall. If you can make a good pick at 2 or lower, you can make the same pick at 1. You always want 1.

Not disputing that.

But not getting 1 doesn't mean you don't get the best in the draft. What comes after is just as important.

Point being, no matter where the lakers draft, they won't get the best player in the draft because their development is horrible.

[Buddy Mignon]

I'm going to be pissed if we don't get a top 3. They owe us from the Paul scam.

[Killakobe81]

I am not entirely sure if the Lakers fan learned anything from Dirk, Curry and Durant, and it's that you don't need the #1 pick for the best player in the draft. Sure having the #1 pick helps, but with proper management, the right training, fitting a talent within a system, getting the right system, and acquiring the right team, you don't need the #1 pick to be a le contender.

Which is the bigger problem for the Lakers.

1. Durant was a pick that I called ...me over the precious Oden.
2. Dirk was a home-run but give me a break ...dirk had a drive to be great. RC helped unlock the team's potential and I love him but he gets no real credit for Dirk's development and I give minimal credit to the Dallas front office (post trade) except for Cuban's unwillingness to part with him. He had his own shooting coach and it's not like they he only played for RC his whole career.
3. Let's see Blake Griffin, KAT, Adavis etc. were all top selections and Durant would have been except the league continues to gamble on flawed bigs.
4. What was LAkers fans supposed to learn? Wanting the top pick makes sense. Counting/Hoping to unearth Curry, Kiwi, Kobe outside of the top 10 is more foolish than nabbing a the guys i mentioned even if you have to factor busts like Olowakandi and the Bennett kid you are better off picking first. In fact, IIRC you were the one that posted the stats of #2 picks that flopped prior to last year's draft So If I use your own data of course it makes sense to get the best players possible.
5. Like Deeps said if you pick #1 you can go with your top guy even if you are wrong like Portland and live with it ...

Lakers have plenty of problems.
But as Jerry West said when Luke was hired ...lack of talent is chief among them.
Getting a top pick is a way to infuse talent it is on the coaching staff and front-office to develop it.

Not sure why wanting a top pick means that Lakers fans havent learned anything.

[DMC]

Not disputing that.

But not getting 1 doesn't mean you don't get the best in the draft. What comes after is just as important.

Point being, no matter where the lakers draft, they won't get the best player in the draft because their development is horrible.

It could very well mean that you don't get the best in the draft. Having lower odds to get the same guy is always worse than having higher odds. You might still get him, but you don't have the fortune of hindsight when you pick your next Greg Odom (or Kawhi Leonard). You just evaluate and pick who you think you need. The Lakers needed Russell I suppose.

[baseline bum]

I'm going to be pissed if we don't get a top 3. They owe us from the Paul scam.

You still owe them for the Game 6 2002 scam

[DMC]

Lakers are fortunate they didn't get Chris Paul. They'd be in even worse shape.

[Killakobe81]

Not disputing that.

But not getting 1 doesn't mean you don't get the best in the draft. What comes after is just as important.

Point being, no matter where the lakers draft, they won't get the best player in the draft because their development is horrible.

I dont disagree that their talent development has plenty to prove but let's be real they haven't had a lot of talent to develop because they constantly traded their picks. Clarkson developed fine, so did Bynum. (sad we have to go that far back but we just dont value draft picks) Because we actually had a young player to develop the Lakers problem is not about not developing players their problem is actually not having the patience to do so.

BTW Is KAT getting some type of magical development sauce from Minny that Rubio, Johnny Flynn, Wesley Johnson etc did not get? Or could it be that KAT is a special talent and that he could flourish despite Minny having a ty history of developing talent?

I am not saying a great front-office and staff like State, SAS or even OKC doesnt help.
But was Lebron on a team with a track-record of great player development?
what about Durant with the Sonics?
Davis with the Pelicans?

When you get special talent they will develop (eventually) despite teams not being great at it. that is what great players do. Having a great staff can accelerate the process ...but you still need the talent.

Or do you think spurs/state could get something out of the bennett kid from UNLV?

[ambchang]

1. Durant was a pick that I called ...me over the precious Oden.
2. Dirk was a home-run but give me a break ...dirk had a drive to be great. RC helped unlock the team's potential and I love him but he gets no real credit for Dirk's development and I give minimal credit to the Dallas front office (post trade) except for Cuban's unwillingness to part with him. He had his own shooting coach and it's not like they he only played for RC his whole career.
3. Let's see Blake Griffin, KAT, Adavis etc. were all top selections and Durant would have been except the league continues to gamble on flawed bigs.
4. What was LAkers fans supposed to learn? Wanting the top pick makes sense. Counting/Hoping to unearth Curry, Kiwi, Kobe outside of the top 10 is more foolish than nabbing a the guys i mentioned even if you have to factor busts like Olowakandi and the Bennett kid you are better off picking first. In fact, IIRC you were the one that posted the stats of #2 picks that flopped prior to last year's draft So If I use your own data of course it makes sense to get the best players possible.
5. Like Deeps said if you pick #1 you can go with your top guy even if you are wrong like Portland and live with it ...

Lakers have plenty of problems.
But as Jerry West said when Luke was hired ...lack of talent is chief among them.
Getting a top pick is a way to infuse talent it is on the coaching staff and front-office to develop it.

Not sure why wanting a top pick means that Lakers fans havent learned anything.

Didn't say the lakers shouldn't want the first pick. Just saying the lakers will just screw up with a higher position.

[ambchang]

It could very well mean that you don't get the best in the draft. Having lower odds to get the same guy is always worse than having higher odds. You might still get him, but you don't have the fortune of hindsight when you pick your next Greg Odom (or Kawhi Leonard). You just evaluate and pick who you think you need. The Lakers needed Russell I suppose.

The lakers would have screwed up if they had curry Durant and dirk. They don't develop people anymore.

[Killakobe81]

What happened to you tbh?
You decided to fall off a cliff the same tine as Timmy?
Talk about a fan ...

[daslicer]

Im like you I wasnt 100% sure on KAT but I knew he was the best big and player in last year's draft.
Simmons and Ingram are not KAT I think they may not even be as good as Wiggins tbh ...

Bad year to get the top pick tbh
I dont see either guy leading a legit le contender as a #1 ...
Same as russ and Oak last year ...they are #2 at best

KAT was the only legit #1 of the past 3 drafts but I hope to God I am wrong ...

Obviously if your going to get the 1 pick you hope its a year where there is a immediate superstar ala Shaq,Lebron,Duncan but that's rare. Those drafts come around every 5-7 years. The second scenario that is ideal is to draft a player who is all-star caliber and is a year or two away from breaking out ala Durant,Carter. The third scenario is drafting a guy who has great potential and can be a superstar in a few years but is very raw ala Kobe,Dirk, and I would say Porzingis looks like he's going to be in the category. The 4th scenario is drafting a guy like Okafor who will have immediate impact as a good player but probably will never be great. The 5th scenario is you luck out and draft a player who you thought was going to be good but turns out to be an all-time great ala Nash,Curry. The 6th scenario is the worst you end up drafting in a terrible draft ala 2000 NBA draft and only end up with a solid player like Kmart, Mike Miller. I feel this year's draft is the 6th scenario which makes it suck.

[Killakobe81]

Obviously if your going to get the 1 pick you hope its a year where there is a immediate superstar ala Shaq,Lebron,Duncan but that's rare. Those drafts come around every 5-7 years. The second scenario that is ideal is to draft a player who is all-star caliber and is a year or two away from breaking out ala Durant,Carter. The third scenario is drafting a guy who has great potential and can be a superstar in a few years but is very raw ala Kobe,Dirk, and I would say Porzingis looks like he's going to be in the category. The 4th scenario is drafting a guy like Okafor who will have immediate impact as a good player but probably will never be great. The 5th scenario is you luck out and draft a player who you thought was going to be good but turns out to be an all-time great ala Nash,Curry. The 6th scenario is the worst you end up drafting in a terrible draft ala 2000 NBA draft and only end up with a solid player like Kmart, Mike Miller. I feel this year's draft is the 6th scenario which makes it suck.

Not 100% sold on Porzy ...
I THINK HE could be very good
But also get a oft injured great when healthy vibe a la rik smits
We will see

[ambchang]

I dont disagree that their talent development has plenty to prove but let's be real they haven't had a lot of talent to develop because they constantly traded their picks. Clarkson developed fine, so did Bynum. (sad we have to go that far back but we just dont value draft picks) Because we actually had a young player to develop the Lakers problem is not about not developing players their problem is actually not having the patience to do so.

BTW Is KAT getting some type of magical development sauce from Minny that Rubio, Johnny Flynn, Wesley Johnson etc did not get? Or could it be that KAT is a special talent and that he could flourish despite Minny having a ty history of developing talent?

I am not saying a great front-office and staff like State, SAS or even OKC doesnt help.
But was Lebron on a team with a track-record of great player development?
what about Durant with the Sonics?
Davis with the Pelicans?

When you get special talent they will develop (eventually) despite teams not being great at it. that is what great players do. Having a great staff can accelerate the process ...but you still need the talent.

Or do you think spurs/state could get something out of the bennett kid from UNLV?

Minny, pelicans aren't going anywhere. Sure KAT and Davis looks great but their team still isn't contending, which is the point of having a top flight player.

Durant joined when the sonics just started getting new management, since then they had Westbrook, ibaka, and harden,all flourished. Even Steven Adams is doing well.

As for the lakers. Not having the patience is pretty much the same. You get top talent the. They go elsewhere. Clarkson in LA is simply the tallest midget, and Bynum very much got the life suck out of him when he was in LA