dk7th wrote:holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote: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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Nash missed almost half of the season.
CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:CrushAlot wrote:yellowboy90 wrote: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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Nash missed almost half of the season.
no. nash missed 32 games or basically the month and a half from early november to mid-december.
so my question is when he came back why couldn't that team gel and quickly? was bryant too stubborn to play a different style?
