Jump to content




Photo

Mike Brown


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#161 Miggs

Miggs

    16x CHAMPS

  • 2,280 posts
  • Joined: Jan 04, 2010
  • Name:Miguel
  • Fan Since:1988 Finals
  • Fav. Laker:Showtime,Shaq and Kobe

Posted March 26, 2012 - 04:56 AM

should have went with arenas if the 2 spot is now the problem with the lakers coaching staff

#162 Majesty

Majesty

    Grats on making the Raiderettes cuzzo!!

  • 38,590 posts
  • Joined: Dec 11, 2011
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted March 26, 2012 - 05:25 AM

I'm pretty sure Barnes is gonna get the bench 2/3 spot. The only issue is finding a way to create that rotation for a bench by having a 3 out there that isn't Kobe(Cause he needs to rest during that lineup)

Ebanks isn't ready, and Murphy and McRoberts can't play the 3(well maybe Murphy) But it would require Hill having the permanent 5 bench position. With Goudelock out of the rotation(injured and playing poorly) our bench would look like this


Blake
Barnes
Murphy
McRoberts
Hill

Hill is a mystery, and Murphy is a gamble with his shot, McRoberts isn't gonna give you offense outside of dunks nor defense outside of changing shots, and Blake when off is useless, the only thing is he plays a fast pace which Barnes likes but he prefers Sessions style more than Blake's for that kind of thing chemistry wise apparently.

So look at that above lineup. And then you'll understand why Brown has to run Kobe at the 3. Because with THAT lineup we're basically playing 1 or potentially 2 on 5 offensively against a bench squad with a bunch of mysteries.

THIS is why Goudelock was so important when he is playing well and why his injury and bad play couldn't come at a WORSE time. Because it puts Mike Brown in a very awkward situation where he has to rearrange his lineups.


Everyone is all 'well he should have had the lineups figured out by now"

News Flash, he had the lineups figured out, then Blake went out with injury, he found Goudelock, and then he had the lineups figured out and then he lost Fisher but got Sessions, so THEN he had an idea of the lineup figured out(Sessions, Goudelock and Barnes) and then Goudelock injures his Achillies and starts playing real poorly. So NOW he has to figure out an entirely different lineup on the fly in a shortened season. Let's be honest Goudelock was the ONLY thing close to a 2 guard that the Lakers had on their bench, with him injured and playing poorly we'd have to go with Barnes at the 2 but then we got no one really for the 3 other than Ebanks who isn't ready and playing poorly.

Mike Brown's in a REALLY tough spot. And if you fans weren't so judgmental you'd have seen that.

I'm sure Brown would love to give you,

Sessions
Goudelock
Barnes
(whoever)
(whenever)

For the bench unit.

But first, you all wanted Sessions to start and he is so he isn't gonna have much time with them.

Second of all, with Goudelock injured, in his Achilles no less which effects his movement and lift which hurts his shot AND his defense which was already shoddy in the first place it just can't be done, you'd be taking a worse risk.

Any of you in his position would be trying out the same things he is trying out since he has had to rework the bench 3 different times considering rotations trades and injuries each time when he'd had it set in stone prior.

And before you guys go "OH JUST PLAY GOUDELOCK WHO CARES IF HE'S INJURED!"

Remember how bad Ron was last year when he was dealing with the same injury? Phil played him and it came back to bite us, by the playoffs he couldn't even elevate to lay the ball up.

Resting Goudelock and letting him heal WHILE having him work on things like his handles, shot creation and getting him further in tune with the offense(all of which is happening) while he recovers and then playing him at 100% is the better strategy than "playing him through it" he's a freaking rookie, he has a chance to learn, let him take it without risk of getting injured further and looking worse.

Short term issues, but in the long term it helps us a lot.

Of course none of you are thinking that way, which is why you guys aren't NBA coaches ;)



should have went with arenas if the 2 spot is now the problem with the lakers coaching staff


No one expected Goudelock to get injured or fall off badly as he did from it. And the Lakers were trying to get Beasley, it's not like they didn't. But that did not happen so we must deal with the hand we've been dealt.

Would have loved to get Arenas but I think most felt that Goudelock and Arenas would essentially be the same thing. By the time he started really going downhill and that injury tormented him Arenas had already signed with the Grizzlies.

Is Wayne Brady gonna have to Djokovic? - Robert Flores 


#163 True Lakers Fan

True Lakers Fan

    Dead Discussion! You will not win, because I will not lose&a

  • 23,232 posts
  • Joined: May 12, 2009
  • Location:San Antonio but from OC Cali
  • Name:Kyler
  • Fan Since:1990
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe, Swaggy and Kareem

Posted March 26, 2012 - 08:06 AM

idk wtf he was thinking last night

Kobe%20Bryant%20Sig%20v3.jpg


#164 Cowboys&LakersFan

Cowboys&LakersFan

    Go Lakers!

  • 6,333 posts
  • Joined: Jul 13, 2010
  • Name:JD
  • Fan Since:1999
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe & Shaq

Posted March 26, 2012 - 08:08 AM

idk wtf he was thinking last night

He wasn't.
htCCl0m.png

#165 Cj2008nw

Cj2008nw

    Sixth Man

  • 3,119 posts
  • Joined: Dec 26, 2011
  • Fan Since:1999
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted March 26, 2012 - 08:17 AM

Morris\sessions
Barnes \goudelock
Ebanks
Mcroberts\hill
Bynum\Hill
Should be the bench lineup

#166 MDI

MDI

    Jesus Fan

  • 35,948 posts
  • Joined: Jul 24, 2008
  • Location:Irvine
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted March 26, 2012 - 11:18 AM



1.25 mark

Edited by MDI, March 26, 2012 - 11:19 AM.

9u6kvo.png

 

Props to sidthekid871


#167 serenityy

serenityy

    Off The Bench

  • 1,898 posts
  • Joined: Dec 09, 2011
  • Fan Since:1995
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted March 26, 2012 - 11:49 AM

Mike Brown is the 2006 Art Shell of the NBA (:

#168 Jordan-esque

Jordan-esque

    Rookie

  • 374 posts
  • Joined: Jul 15, 2009
  • Fan Since:1989
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted March 26, 2012 - 01:42 PM

Posted Image

#169 Majesty

Majesty

    Grats on making the Raiderettes cuzzo!!

  • 38,590 posts
  • Joined: Dec 11, 2011
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted March 26, 2012 - 02:33 PM

Posted Image


Stupid posting.

It was Kobe's decision to take it 3 on 1 and not pass to the wide open Sessions on two occasions.

He got benched for it. So when Kobe gets benched for trying to do to much and beginning to shoot us out of the game the coach is an idiot. But when he stays on the court the coach has no balls for not benching him? That's funny.

Is Wayne Brady gonna have to Djokovic? - Robert Flores 


#170 ツ  

ツ  

    All-Star

  • 5,697 posts
  • Joined: Jul 09, 2010
  • Location:California
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted March 26, 2012 - 07:01 PM

Blake
Barnes
Murphy
McRoberts
Hill


I would love that bench lineup, but of course Brown would never do this.

Edited by ツ  , March 26, 2012 - 07:01 PM.


#171 Majesty

Majesty

    Grats on making the Raiderettes cuzzo!!

  • 38,590 posts
  • Joined: Dec 11, 2011
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted March 26, 2012 - 08:31 PM

I would love that bench lineup, but of course Brown would never do this.



Dude the only person in that entire lineup you can count on to score would be Barnes and that would only be if Blake got a fast pace going . Blake and Murphy are both shots in the dark offensively and McRoberts is going to change shots, and Hill is a mystery. It wouldn't be smart to go with that lineup as your primary bench mob I put that lineup there as a point.

Is Wayne Brady gonna have to Djokovic? - Robert Flores 


#172 ツ  

ツ  

    All-Star

  • 5,697 posts
  • Joined: Jul 09, 2010
  • Location:California
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted March 26, 2012 - 08:51 PM

Dude the only person in that entire lineup you can count on to score would be Barnes and that would only be if Blake got a fast pace going . Blake and Murphy are both shots in the dark offensively and McRoberts is going to change shots, and Hill is a mystery. It wouldn't be smart to go with that lineup as your primary bench mob I put that lineup there as a point.


That at least gives us extra size. Hill could bring up decent numbers off the bench once he gets PT. Better than Blake-???(glock out of rotation)-Barnes-Bob-Murph.

Edited by ツ  , March 26, 2012 - 08:52 PM.


#173    

   

  • 40,431 posts
  • Joined: Aug 26, 2010

Posted March 27, 2012 - 09:29 PM

I'm really getting sick of this guy man. Clearly, he is not the only issue, but he is one of several things that is holding us back. Hated some of the lineups/rotations out there tonight. Need to see more Sessions WITHOUT Kobe on the floor at the same time and also more Sessions WITH BARNES DAMN IT!!! among other things to name a few... no Goudelock AT ALL still when Blake isn't giving us anything.. No Hill, though I guess he had a 'sprained knee' now, riiight, doesn't matter anyway, wouldn't play him SMH.

yo.


#174 Hollywood

Hollywood

    "Hey Now"

  • 17,703 posts
  • Joined: Dec 27, 2011
  • Location:Berkeley
  • Name:Fernando
  • Fan Since:Kobe Shaq Era
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe, Shaq, West, D12?

Posted March 27, 2012 - 09:30 PM

Players are noticing too and loosing respect for him
Posted Image

#175 Miggs

Miggs

    16x CHAMPS

  • 2,280 posts
  • Joined: Jan 04, 2010
  • Name:Miguel
  • Fan Since:1988 Finals
  • Fav. Laker:Showtime,Shaq and Kobe

Posted March 28, 2012 - 04:16 AM

Brown is really pissing me off. Is he a teal dumb ass. Why in hell would u take out barnes and throw in Blake to match up with rush and Thompson. Why why. What wrong with him is he getting stupider as the season goes? then he benches Bynum and the warriors take advantage knowing we can't match up with them. If he has issues with a player do it behind close doors. Don't bench a key part of this team. When we are trying to win games. Guys an idiot.

#176 JayTheGreat

JayTheGreat

    Rookie

  • 1,014 posts
  • Joined: Feb 11, 2012
  • Fan Since:1994
  • Fav. Laker:Robert Horry

Posted March 28, 2012 - 05:32 AM

Steve Blake sucks and should only get 5-10 mins a game. Sessions should be allowed to run the offense and have it catered around him making plays for Gasol and Bynum. Not the other way around. Last night all I saw was Sessions bring it up the floor and pass it to Kobe or the post. Why??? Why not set up plays for Sessions to do what he does and get Bynum easy dump offs and Gasol wide open jumpers. Mike Brown is a idiot. His offensive scheme is stupid.

Edited by JayTheGreat, March 28, 2012 - 06:06 AM.


#177 Hollywood

Hollywood

    "Hey Now"

  • 17,703 posts
  • Joined: Dec 27, 2011
  • Location:Berkeley
  • Name:Fernando
  • Fan Since:Kobe Shaq Era
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe, Shaq, West, D12?

Posted March 28, 2012 - 06:15 AM

^ :rock:
Posted Image

#178 KarlCalaguas12

KarlCalaguas12

    Off The Bench

  • 2,080 posts
  • Joined: Dec 30, 2011
  • Name:Karl
  • Fan Since:2000
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted March 28, 2012 - 06:38 AM

Brown is really pissing me off. Is he a teal dumb ass. Why in hell would u take out barnes and throw in Blake to match up with rush and Thompson. Why why. What wrong with him is he getting stupider as the season goes? then he benches Bynum and the warriors take advantage knowing we can't match up with them. If he has issues with a player do it behind close doors. Don't bench a key part of this team. When we are trying to win games. Guys an idiot.


So, you are saying that you wouldn't bench Bynum after that boneheaded play? He didn't bench Bynum because of match-ups, he benched Bynum because he was being immature. Also, Brandon Rush was playing point guard for the Warriors. So, you expect Steve Blake to guard another forward? Mark Jackson played mostly forwards at the end of the game so it doesn't matter who Steve Blake guarded because he will have a size disadvantage.

#179 Hollywood

Hollywood

    "Hey Now"

  • 17,703 posts
  • Joined: Dec 27, 2011
  • Location:Berkeley
  • Name:Fernando
  • Fan Since:Kobe Shaq Era
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe, Shaq, West, D12?

Posted March 28, 2012 - 06:39 AM

I thought it was a good 3 pretty wide open
Posted Image

#180 L.A.K.E.R

L.A.K.E.R

    Gomu Gomu

  • 14,821 posts
  • Joined: Jul 24, 2008
  • Location:California
  • Name:Shamim
  • Fan Since:2000
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted March 28, 2012 - 08:33 AM

So, you expect Steve Blake to guard another forward? Mark Jackson played mostly forwards at the end of the game so it doesn't matter who Steve Blake guarded because he will have a size disadvantage.


If Brandon Rush was really running the 1 and there were no other legitimate playmaking guards on the floor for the Warriors, then Blake simply shouldn't be in the game at that point. He'd just be a complete liability on the defensive end of the floor. If the Warriors aren't running any legitimate facilitator, that would be the perfect time to trot out a bigger lineup where you probably wouldn't need a PG. If Blake is forced to match up with players that are 3-4 inches taller than him and much more athletic, he's going to get burnt every time.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users