NBA · OT: Dwight Howard voiced concerns frustrations/concerns over MDA... (page 1)
http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story...
LOS ANGELES -- The Los Angeles Lakers do not yet know Dwight Howard's decision for next season, but the All-Star center made his feelings about Lakers coach Mike D'Antoni known before starting his offseason.
Nearly three weeks have passed since Howard had his exit interview with the Lakers and there's been barely a peep out of Howard since.
While he hasn't had anything to say to the press, Howard had a lot to say to Lakers general manager Mitch Kupchak back before the relative silence, however.
Howard
Howard
Howard was one of several Lakers -- Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol being the most noteworthy -- to have an extended separate meeting with the GM after his exit interview with both Kupchak and D'Antoni, multiple sources confirmed to ESPNLosAngeles.com.
According to sources with knowledge of the situation, part of the discussion between Howard and Kupchak centered around Howard's frustration with D'Antoni -- particularly how the center felt marginalized as the coach looked to Bryant and Steve Nash for leadership and suggestions and discounted Howard's voice.
Every player was afforded the opportunity to meet with Kupchak individually after D'Antoni left the room, but few spent as much time as Howard and Kupchak did together. Antawn Jamison also had a separate meeting with Kupchak without D'Antoni present, but that was because of a scheduling conflict.
Kupchak left the meeting with Howard undeterred, telling reporters he was "hopeful" and "optimistic" that Howard would be back with the Lakers next season and beyond, yet there have been several developments in the last couple weeks that could have an effect on Howard's decision.
D'Antoni chose not to retain assistant coach Chuck Person, a Howard confidant, on his staff for next season. Also, Lakers assistant coach Steve Clifford, who was with Howard in Orlando for five seasons before both of them came to L.A. last year, has become a hot head coaching candidate, interviewing with Milwaukee and receiving interest from Charlotte.
One source described the potential departure of Clifford, coupled with the loss of Person as "removing the buffers," between Howard and D'Antoni, "which is a bad thing."
Howard has not conducted any interviews since the standard exit interview with the press and has only tweeted six times in that span -- one tweet containing a silly tongue twister joke, two tweets from a '50s-style theme restaurant, two sponsored tweet promoting contact lenses and one tweet on Mother's Day -- so there have been no public clues about what decision the pending free agent will make.
Howard is currently on vacation in the meantime as the days tick by on the six weeks remaining until free agency officially begins.
Bryant addressed the uncertainty surrounding Howard on Monday, tweeting, "Interesting off season looming.. Will spend time with d12 #stay and talk with the Buss family in hopes that Pau stays as well #my2cents"
Howard can sign a five-year, $118 million max-level extension to stay in L.A. come July 1. The most he could receive if he were to leave is a four-year deal worth $87.6 million.
The $30.4 million more the Lakers can offer over any other competitor is certainly an advantage L.A. is banking on when it comes time for Howard to choose, however the economics aren't as swayed towards the Lakers as it would appear.
Two of the teams that will covet Howard's services the most this summer -- the Houston Rockets and Dallas Mavericks -- are located in Texas, where there is no income tax. Howard would still have to pay taxes on road games and other taxes, such as property taxes in Texas tend to be higher than in other states, and the endorsement opportunities in Houston could be less than they are in L.A., yet still, the salary difference doesn't seem to bother Howard.
Houston has become an attractive destination for Howard for several other reasons, according to a source. For starters, Howard has gotten to know the Houston area, as well as the history of the franchise, from working out with Rockets Hall of Famer Hakeem Olajuwon two summers ago. Furthermore, the 27-year-old Howard is intrigued by the possibility of growing his game alongside a fellow All-Star on the rise in James Harden, who turns 24 in August.
Howard is expected to entertain the free-agency process and hear competing offers from Houston, Dallas and others, multiple sources told ESPNLosAngeles.com. Cleveland and Atlanta are teams that will also be vying for Howard, among other suitors.
The question remains as to how much of a hurdle D'Antoni's presence could prove to be in Howard's chances of remaining a Laker.
"We had to just sell out to whatever he wanted, whether we liked it or not," Howard said of D'Antoni following his exit interview. "We had to do what was going to benefit the team, and being one of the leaders on the team, I had to make sure I kept the guys in line to what the coach wanted us to do."
A source said Howard was very careful with his public comments about D'Antoni after the season, wary of attracting a "coach killer reputation" after how things ended in Orlando with Stan Van Gundy losing his job. Despite the frustration Howard had with D'Antoni last season, there is nothing to suggest the partnership is irreparable. "It's not a, 'It's me or Mike,' situation for Dwight," said a source.
Kupchak did not seem worried about any potential rift between player and coach.
"I think Dwight likes winning, he likes performing at a high level," Kupchak said. "I think he's fine with Mike D'Antoni, but I'm not really concerned if players like a coach, so I don't ask that question. Our coaches are evaluated by wins and losses."
Kupchak was further pressed about the possibility of a coaching change being dictated by a player.
"This organization has a precedent with that kind of a situation and I think we learned our lesson," Kupchak said, referring to when Paul Westhead was fired in the early '80s and the decision was tied to Magic Johnson's wishes. Whether that was the real story or not, both Johnson and the Lakers organization took a hit for how it was perceived.
NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.
Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
I posted awhile back that they will have room for Dwight and their core still intact. Hey will have to let go of some veterans like Delfino and Garcia but small price to pay for Dwight. This is why Morey gave Morris for a 2nd rounder to PHX and Patterson to the Kings for TRob. He was laying the groundwork for he off-season.
CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
If I was Howard I would think about going their straight up to get so cool points. Not sure I would do but I would think about.
If I am LA and Howard leaves I am blowing up the team and amnestying Kobe. The last part won't happen but if Kobe was smart he would do it. He still gets paid and he could sit out the whole year to recover. Let them trade Gasol for a pick or player/s. Then come back with LA when they have cap room possible multiple 1st rd picks in 2014(maybe Lottery) and a ton of cap space.
IF they lose Howard why would it be smart for Kobe to rush back?
NYKBocker wrote:CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
I posted awhile back that they will have room for Dwight and their core still intact. Hey will have to let go of some veterans like Delfino and Garcia but small price to pay for Dwight. This is why Morey gave Morris for a 2nd rounder to PHX and Patterson to the Kings for TRob. He was laying the groundwork for he off-season.
I don't know about the Patterson move. Robinson is more salary and not as good of player. So far.
CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.
If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
over DHow...
CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
Injuries, age, the worst bench in the league, and quite frankly, a diva center who was injured and can't hit free throws and a roster that is opposite of MDA's specialty. if you look solely at that point of view, he had a pretty impressive season. Keep in mind that the guy who came before him went 1-17 if you combine preseason and the first five games of the regular season before he got fired.
I do think MDA caused some problems in LA, and while he didn't do a great job, I also don't think he did a terrible job either.
Solace wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
Injuries, age, the worst bench in the league, and quite frankly, a diva center who was injured and can't hit free throws and a roster that is opposite of MDA's specialty. if you look solely at that point of view, he had a pretty impressive season. Keep in mind that the guy who came before him went 1-17 if you combine preseason and the first five games of the regular season before he got fired.
I do think MDA caused some problems in LA, and while he didn't do a great job, I also don't think he did a terrible job either.
They are saying Howard will be back to full strength next year..Lets not forget Howard took him team to the Finals with no help...Zero..
holfresh wrote:Solace wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
Injuries, age, the worst bench in the league, and quite frankly, a diva center who was injured and can't hit free throws and a roster that is opposite of MDA's specialty. if you look solely at that point of view, he had a pretty impressive season. Keep in mind that the guy who came before him went 1-17 if you combine preseason and the first five games of the regular season before he got fired.
I do think MDA caused some problems in LA, and while he didn't do a great job, I also don't think he did a terrible job either.
They are saying Howard will be back to full strength next year..
Sure. I don't think MDA deserves to be fired based on what we saw. However, I also think if it's between him and Dwight, you have to take Dwight. But I am, at this point, under the opinion that you can't build a franchise around Dwight either. Dwight would be better off a team with an established star. Due to his attitude and ridiculously poor free throw shooting, I don't think I can rank him top 15 anymore.
holfresh wrote:Solace wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
Injuries, age, the worst bench in the league, and quite frankly, a diva center who was injured and can't hit free throws and a roster that is opposite of MDA's specialty. if you look solely at that point of view, he had a pretty impressive season. Keep in mind that the guy who came before him went 1-17 if you combine preseason and the first five games of the regular season before he got fired.
I do think MDA caused some problems in LA, and while he didn't do a great job, I also don't think he did a terrible job either.
They are saying Howard will be back to full strength next year..Lets not forget Howard took him team to the Finals with no help...Zero..
In the east, though... In the west, can he make it past the second round? I'm not sure. I also don't think he's the same player. His free throw shooting gets worse every year. How is that possible?
CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
did bryant buy in to d'antoni's way of doing things or did he resist for a major part of the season? not a rhetorical question i want to know.
anyone with an honest take around here?
dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
did bryant buy in to d'antoni's way of doing things or did he resist for a major part of the season? not a rhetorical question i want to know.
anyone with an honest take around here?
He bought in and did some facilitating for a short period if I recall correctly. Why do you ask?
dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
did bryant buy in to d'antoni's way of doing things or did he resist for a major part of the season? not a rhetorical question i want to know.
anyone with an honest take around here?
No.. He ball hogged as usual..As yourself this, who would MDA rather run the offense, Kobe or Nash??...
CrushAlot wrote:I don't really care if the Lakers keep Howard. I just don't let him walk if D'Antoni is in the way of his staying. It would be fun to see what the Lakers do if he leaves. Do they still move Pau? Do they amnesty Kobe?
Yeah if the Lakers had to choose I doubt they pick D'antoni. Since we're talking about the Lakers I have to say im glad Nash didnt come here. I know Kidd was garbage but at least he had a good run. Nash was barely on the court all season.
holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
did bryant buy in to d'antoni's way of doing things or did he resist for a major part of the season? not a rhetorical question i want to know.
anyone with an honest take around here?
No.. He ball hogged as usual..As yourself this, who would MDA rather run the offense, Kobe or Nash??...
i would assume nash and that both nash and bryant could take turns at shooting guard. at point nash does his thing and runs pick and rolls with howard for cookies; and with gasol pick and pop or finds bryant in rhythm for a catch and shoot. seems so easy... so long as bryant bought in.
doesn't sound like he did and the result is dysfunction and disaster.
dk7th wrote:Nash missed almost half of the season.holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:You would let Howard leave to keep Mike D'Antoni? What players exactly does he need to succeed? He had a heck of a roster and with hofs on it this year. Granted there were injuries but he muddled things up pretty quickly.CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Asik and Lin are moved in a deal to get Howard. LA is screwed if they lose Howard. If there is one thing franchises should have learned from D'Antoni's tenure in NY it is don't waste years of time and make moves trying to make a bad hire work. Move on. Cleveland is paying Mike Brown now so that should free up some money.NYKBocker wrote:Howard is going to end up in Houston.Would they keep Asik? Also, what money would they have left to tie up Parsons?
MDA was only a "bad hire" in NY because they wasted 2 full seasons not trying to build a team at all. Why you fail to make note of that is beyond me. If the Lakers UNLIKE NY actually try to field a winning team and get the kind of TEAM BB players MDA is good with, they won't have a problem. There's no need to move on as if MDA is a lousy coach that has never had any success. Just don't give him scrubs with no PG and expect him to work miracles.If Howard leaves they would no longer have to be locked into playing a style that features Howard and thus no reason they can't build a team fitted more to what MDA likes to run. They can do what NY FAILED to do, which is get MDA the players needed to succeed. TEAM BB players and not ball hogs who aren't capable of playing great TEAM BB. IMO the Lakers don't NEED Howard to be successful. There are other combinations of players that could work even if he leaves.
did bryant buy in to d'antoni's way of doing things or did he resist for a major part of the season? not a rhetorical question i want to know.
anyone with an honest take around here?
No.. He ball hogged as usual..As yourself this, who would MDA rather run the offense, Kobe or Nash??...
i would assume nash and that both nash and bryant could take turns at shooting guard. at point nash does his thing and runs pick and rolls with howard for cookies; and with gasol pick and pop or finds bryant in rhythm for a catch and shoot. seems so easy... so long as bryant bought in.
doesn't sound like he did and the result is dysfunction and disaster.