When wel ost to OKC in five, you had Stephen A Smith going right after Jim Buss immediately for I guess not trading Bynum or whatever it was.
So when Dwight and Nash come through, the only one to question at that point was Mike Brown and how he would handle things, and then the princeton offense.
We went from second round team, to couldnt win a pre season game and only could beat Detroit, with Kobe and metta playing much better than the year before. MUCH better from Metta's perspective especially.
trade him and win with Bernie, some good games, and so d'Antoni changes the style and we have bad results for the most part. Then the bigs all go down, we were 1- and 22 and in postion to win before Dwight, Pau and Hill are all lost in the same gamer. With NO bigs, we couldn't beat ANYONE.
Eventually Dwight came back, but he took a step back with his injury . We ended up 17-25 after the Memphis loss.
From then, 28-12...and it wasn't ALL kobe.
The point is, this team has SOME REAL potential , and I believe that even DESPITE D'Antoni's shortcomings, if we keep Howard, we can be really good
I remember a Lakers team that won 61 games coached by Harris before being swept by the Jazz a team I loathed.
Our team has potential. I think Brown had the right "style" for us and the right basic blueprint.
But I think he just didn't know how he wanted to teach it or coach it, the Princeton wasn't his, it was Eddie Jordan's.
Bernie knew how to simplify things down, and they simplified it and what do you know we won some games cause we weren't thinking so much.
You know how in 2k13 where you can set your "Run plays" Meter up to 99 and then if you run CPU vs CPU the team with the "run plays" meter at 99 flows it beautifully, when the offense clicks, but if one person is out of place or one defender is out of place the play breaks down to the end of the shot clock or results in a turnover?
THAT was us.
Bernie turned it down to 50 and we played a lot better.
I think if we'd built on that foundation we'd have been fine.
See, the advantage of us when we learned the triangle(the little brother to the Princeton) was the fact that we had played years together before Phil got there, so we already knew each others habits, and though it took us an entire pre-season to understand the triangle, we grasped it because we were dealing with learning the system, not learning each other's habits.
But in THIS situation not only did we have to learn the new system, we had to learn the new system, we had to learn the new teammates, we had to learn each others habits all in one and THAT was proving too difficult a task.
I used to grab at my hair whenever we'd foul someone after leading them to Dwight who would then block the shot
That plus learning something complex like the Princeton just proved a LOT of struggle early on. Then losing Nash made it worse.
I will say that when we played those pre-season games, whenever we played our full lineup we usually always had the lead, when we put in our end of the bench guys we didn't.
Even the game we bought Dwight in we were winning pretty comfortably and then we sat down our starters.
The next game we didn't have Dwight cause he was sore, and then the next 2 we didn't have Kobe cause his foot was sore.
So I don't take so much from the pre-season there.
Season opener, Dwight was so... un Dwight that one of the first wide open dunks we got him he barely made it over the rim and the missed free throws lost us that one. In our second game we lost Nash and the rest is history but I will say that Jazz loss we missed some of the most wide open shots we would get that season That offense did put us in good positions to score, we would just muck it up thinking too much or hesitating on shots. Though I will say if our coach was a coach like Phil that knew how to coach things princeton triangle etc it would have been easier of a transition though we still would have struggled learning everyone's tendencies and I think the front office would have been more patient.
Edited by Majesty, June 23, 2013 - 10:51 PM.