Jodie Meeks: signs with Pistons-3 yr / 19mil!?!? = cya

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Chillbongo on Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:04 pm

Wait, so Clark/Jamison aren't hitting shots, so we should play Meeks?

IIRC, Meeks was 1-4 on the night and a combined Jamison AND Clark were 1-4. The game before? Meeks 2-10, Clark + Jamison, 6-13.

MWP should play, but 32 minutes when he's cold as ice and coming still recovering a torn meniscus?

You think it's wise to play Nash 30 minutes and start his first game back after not playing since some time in March?

I'm fine with Blake playing 40 minutes and giving spot minutes to Morris. We won two games that way, without Kobe.

My main point was regarding Clarks and Jamison. I know you know that shouldn't happen.
User avatar
Chillbongo

 
Posts: 3219
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby therealdeal on Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:09 pm

Got to read the whole sentence, Chill.

Meeks was still working hard. Just because he wasn't making shots, doesn't mean he wasn't doing SOMETHING. What did Jamison/Clark do on the floor? Did you remember even seeing Clark? He wasn't in the action at all.

What do you want from this roster, man? :man10: Ebanks isn't playing, so someone has to. You want Meeks' minutes down, Artest's minutes down, Nash's minutes down... well then who plays?

I think it's wise to do what we need to for a win. If Nash is available in the playoffs, I'm going to play him 30 minutes if I think it'll win me the game. This is the big stage, no more point in "saving" him if he can't come through now.

How come it's okay to play Blake 40 minutes, but nobody else?

If Clark can't have a positive impact on the game, he shouldn't play. And in yesterday's game he did NOTHING. I would have sat him down too. He's 6'10" and athletic, he should be getting boards over guys on the Spurs for damn sure. Meeks at least works his butt off. Clark didn't do that and so he didn't play. When he's active, he's left in the game.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39830
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:15 pm

Glock should play somewhere or at least give him a shot, more than some random 6minutes, hopefully he does what is expected of him and worse comes to worse he bricks and gets lite up so replicating Meeks out there.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10404
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Chillbongo on Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:25 pm

therealdeal wrote:What did Jamison/Clark do on the floor? Did you remember even seeing Clark? He wasn't in the action at all.

You saying they're gassed? We've gotten good games out of Jamison all year long. Clark has been spotty of late but if you ask me, both those guys have more basketball skills than Meeks. They can do more on the floor than Meeks, that's a fact.

Meeks should be on the floor to space. If he isn't making shots, he's useless. Sure he's a "hustler" but it doesn't matter when you're getting beat on D, going under screens and turning the ball over. If your hustle provides nothing because your skill set is limited, it really doesn't matter.

Playing Clark 12 and Jamison 16 is enough for them to make an impact, sure. But those guys should be playing 25 minutes a game! Unless Clark is injured or something I won't accept that playing him 12 minutes is fine. There's plenty of times other guys aren't "doing it" on the floor...and still get minutes. It's almost like, the dude played so well at times this year that if he drops off from that, he's playing s*****. That's not fair.

You can cut 5-7 of Artest's minutes and give them to Clark. Cut 5 minutes of Nash and give it to Blake. You can play Meeks the same, but if he's horrible throw Blake at the 2 (or Nash) and play Morris 5 damn minutes.
therealdeal wrote:I think it's wise to do what we need to for a win. If Nash is available in the playoffs, I'm going to play him 30 minutes if I think it'll win me the game. This is the big stage, no more point in "saving" him if he can't come through now.

Completely agree with that mindset but Nash is a revolving door on defense. At least Morris and Blake can stay in front of their guys sometimes. Dude is obviously hurt and his legs aren't there, evident in his jump shot.

IMO not that he shouldn't play 30 ever, just not his first game or two. Playing a hobbled guy because we shouldn't "save" him for anything isn't going to help us if he can't give us his all. Feel me?
therealdeal wrote:How come it's okay to play Blake 40 minutes, but nobody else?

Not complaining about Dwight or Pau's minutes. We need that.
User avatar
Chillbongo

 
Posts: 3219
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby therealdeal on Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:12 am

I'm not saying they're gassed, I'm saying in THAT particular game they were really ineffective. Jamison was on the floor for 15 minutes and had no rebounds, no assists, no steals, no blocks, one turnover, and three fouls. He chipped in 6 points, but for our wily old vet off the bench, we need more production from him.

Clark is young and inconsistent, but the kid played 11 and a half minutes, didn't even ATTEMPT a shot and had only one rebound and a foul. That's not going to cut it.

Meanwhile Meeks (who I agree is actually less talented/capable) was energized, worked hard, and even though he didn't produce as much, he was definitely out there working his butt off. The other guys couldn't get that going. We're used to seeing Jamison get more minutes, but the fouls and ineffective all-around play kept him out of this last game.

My point is that if those guys are going to play (Jamison/Clark), they HAVE to produce. 10 minutes on the floor and Jordan Hill can get you probably 4/4 with a steal or a block. 10 minutes on the floor and Clark/Jamison together got 6/1 with more fouls than anything else. I AGREE they should play more, but they are the ones that have to earn those minutes by being productive with them.

I see what you're saying about Nash, but he was really our only hope out there. He kind of still is. Maybe having him back at all makes us weaker mentally, but the team really honestly doesn't have anyone who can create for himself/others. Nash was our only hope in the last game, so he had to play the minutes. I didn't have any real problem with it.

I'm just not sure Blake/Dwight/Pau should all play that much. It's asking for more tired legs and injuries... I just wish we had Hill back and that Morris was worth a crap.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39830
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby GoldenKnight on Tue Apr 23, 2013 10:32 am

khmrP wrote:^^^^Sasha and Madsen reborn


Yea right, would much rather have Sasha right now than Jodie.
Image

CHECK OUT MY DESIGNS ON FB/INSTAGRAM/TWITTER: @GoldenKnightGFX
User avatar
GoldenKnight

 
Posts: 2185
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:57 am

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Doc Brown on Tue Apr 23, 2013 11:40 am

Mike Bresnahan ‏@Mike_Bresnahan 6m
Jodie Meeks (sprained ankle) did not practice again for the Lakers. Still hoping to play Wednesday.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More


Please by Glock, we need floor spacing in the worst way.......

Or just play Morris, which is going to happen and wonder why the stupid offense doesn't work.

If I have to see another....28 minute / 4 points / 1-5 FG / 0-3 3pt / 2 TO game....it won't be a good day.

Glock would outproduce both them clowns combined and that was proven last year.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19415
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Chillbongo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 11:47 am

therealdeal wrote:Meanwhile Meeks (who I agree is actually less talented/capable) was energized, worked hard, and even though he didn't produce as much, he was definitely out there working his butt off.

If that's the rationale for keeping someone in the game, why doesn't that argument stand for Morris?
therealdeal wrote:My point is that if those guys are going to play (Jamison/Clark), they HAVE to produce.

It's like we're judging people by different metrics. Jamison is one thing because he's older and not a defender. But especially for Clark, it's like If he isn't putting up 10/10 then GTFO. Typica MDA MO - if you play like s*** for 10 minutes, you're riding pine.

Maybe he had one bad game, but unless he's hurt or visibly DGAF like Kwame, he could play more minutes. Our strategy for the game kind of kept him away from the ball. He's not supposed to crowd the paint (cutting) and needed to be in position to get back on D quick (crashing boards). He didn't take a shot - was he kicked out to? The game plan was different Sunday. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be in -- coach needs to learn how to make use of his players strengths.

Meeks has never put up 10/10 let alone 10 points consistently. 1/5 games does he rack 10+, on top of being a niche player, ineffective on defense and sometimes turnover prone. But because he gives energy that provides nothing to us winning games, let's keep him in the game?

therealdeal wrote:I'm just not sure Blake/Dwight/Pau should all play that much. It's asking for more tired legs and injuries... I just wish we had Hill back and that Morris was worth a crap.

Well with our 7 man rotation we can't play them any less if we want to win. With Kobe/Hill out, Nash hurt and no other guards off the bench, we need to run those guys 40 minutes in the playoffs. They're healthy right now and as you said, there's no reason to save guys at this point.
User avatar
Chillbongo

 
Posts: 3219
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby dj vitus on Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:03 pm

Chillbongo wrote:It's like we're judging people by different metrics. Jamison is one thing because he's older and not a defender. But especially for Clark, it's like If he isn't putting up 10/10 then GTFO. Typica MDA MO - if you play like s*** for 10 minutes, you're riding pine.

This is what I've been noticing a lot. MDA has the same short leash for certain players like Mike Brown before him. Miss 2 shots and you're done.

"Missed 2 shots? Sit down. Committed 2 turnovers? Sit down." At the end of the day, everyone will end up with sub-par stats. That's just terrible coaching.

It's like making bets with someone. You can't always quit when you're behind, or you'll never get ahead. You'll always end up in the negative.

Ironically, he's been putting trust in Jodie Meeks while he continues to chuck up brick after brick. Clark and Jamison never get the chance to play to their potential, and we essentially get the worst of both worlds. :freak2:
"Why are they blocking out all the good stuff? They let Sarah Jessica Parker's face on TV and she looks like a foot!!"
User avatar
dj vitus

 
Posts: 9338
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: Walnut, CA by way of Laaaas Vegas!

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby lotus on Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:23 pm

khmrP wrote:^^^^Sasha and Madsen reborn

In that case, leave Meeks on the team because I need some comic relief. And since Pau is playing better lately, I need someone to incessantly criticize.

Here's to Meeks dribble driving to the hoop only to get swatted by the rim. :beer:
lotus

 
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 8:15 am

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby therealdeal on Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:18 pm

Chillbongo wrote:If that's the rationale for keeping someone in the game, why doesn't that argument stand for Morris?

Because he's easily the worst player on our roster. Morris makes Jodie look like a legitimate starter in the NBA.
Chillbongo wrote:It's like we're judging people by different metrics. Jamison is one thing because he's older and not a defender. But especially for Clark, it's like If he isn't putting up 10/10 then GTFO. Typica MDA MO - if you play like s*** for 10 minutes, you're riding pine.

I'm not judging them for any other metric than when you're in the game, you need a positive impact. That's my only metric. If Clark is going to be in the game he has to do more than get one rebound. I mean... was he setting good screens even? Was he moving the ball? Was he running? I can tell you honestly that I have NO IDEA and that means he probably wasn't because you and I would notice those things. I'm not saying he needs to have 10/10, I'm saying he CAN'T have 0/1/0/0/0 with 0 FG attempts.
Chillbongo wrote:Maybe he had one bad game, but unless he's hurt or visibly DGAF like Kwame, he could play more minutes. Our strategy for the game kind of kept him away from the ball. He's not supposed to crowd the paint (cutting) and needed to be in position to get back on D quick (crashing boards). He didn't take a shot - was he kicked out to? The game plan was different Sunday. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be in -- coach needs to learn how to make use of his players strengths.

Strategy or not, when he's at his best he's attacking the boards and defending with a purpose. He's helping on defense, he's running the floor, he's spacing effectively. He didn't do any of those things and because of that he SHOULDN'T be in. I might not sit him as long as D'Antoni, but I'd certainly sit yell at him on the sidelines. He's got too much talent to NOT DO ANYTHING on the floor while he's out there. There's no defending the kind of game he had. He's GOT to do better.

Chillbongo wrote:Meeks has never put up 10/10 let alone 10 points consistently. 1/5 games does he rack 10+, on top of being a niche player, ineffective on defense and sometimes turnover prone. But because he gives energy that provides nothing to us winning games, let's keep him in the game?

If my choice is between someone who will provide energy with nothing or a person who will provide nothing with nothing, then yes.

Chillbongo wrote:Well with our 7 man rotation we can't play them any less if we want to win. With Kobe/Hill out, Nash hurt and no other guards off the bench, we need to run those guys 40 minutes in the playoffs. They're healthy right now and as you said, there's no reason to save guys at this point.

But you disagreed! :man10:

And we ran a 9 man rotation last game. We played Nash/Blake/Peace/Gasol/Howard/Morris/Meeks/Jamison/Clark. I guarantee you if Jamison shoots/makes more shots he plays more minutes. I guarantee you that if Clark comes out and gets a couple boards and blocks a shot he'll play more minutes too. We just need guys to step up and do things.

I'm not even defending Meeks. I said after the game, the kid needs to make buckets. But if the option is a kid who works his butt off every play but can't hit a shot or a guy who isn't working hard enough AND can't/won't hit a shot... I'll pick the first one every time.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 39830
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby XXIV on Wed Apr 24, 2013 12:32 pm

Any update as to whether he'll be playing tonight? I know he's been playing like crap but we're getting short on wing players.
Last edited by XXIV on Wed Apr 24, 2013 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
XXIV

 
Posts: 6384
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 11:20 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby karacha on Wed Apr 24, 2013 12:40 pm

I'm pretty sure he'll play.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37437
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby pound4pound1 on Wed Apr 24, 2013 12:54 pm

anyone else here just sigh the moment you see Meeks jack up an open shot?
.
Jerry Buss wrote:One of the biggest reasons I bought the Lakers was to beat the Celtics …..you just got it into your soul that you couldn't stand the Celtics anymore
User avatar
pound4pound1

 
Posts: 6296
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:47 am
Location: 818 LAKER NATION

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby nthydro on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:10 pm

Chillbongo wrote:
therealdeal wrote:Meanwhile Meeks (who I agree is actually less talented/capable) was energized, worked hard, and even though he didn't produce as much, he was definitely out there working his butt off.

If that's the rationale for keeping someone in the game, why doesn't that argument stand for Morris?
therealdeal wrote:My point is that if those guys are going to play (Jamison/Clark), they HAVE to produce.

It's like we're judging people by different metrics. Jamison is one thing because he's older and not a defender. But especially for Clark, it's like If he isn't putting up 10/10 then GTFO. Typica MDA MO - if you play like s*** for 10 minutes, you're riding pine.

Maybe he had one bad game, but unless he's hurt or visibly DGAF like Kwame, he could play more minutes. Our strategy for the game kind of kept him away from the ball. He's not supposed to crowd the paint (cutting) and needed to be in position to get back on D quick (crashing boards). He didn't take a shot - was he kicked out to? The game plan was different Sunday. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be in -- coach needs to learn how to make use of his players strengths.

Meeks has never put up 10/10 let alone 10 points consistently. 1/5 games does he rack 10+, on top of being a niche player, ineffective on defense and sometimes turnover prone. But because he gives energy that provides nothing to us winning games, let's keep him in the game?

therealdeal wrote:I'm just not sure Blake/Dwight/Pau should all play that much. It's asking for more tired legs and injuries... I just wish we had Hill back and that Morris was worth a crap.

Well with our 7 man rotation we can't play them any less if we want to win. With Kobe/Hill out, Nash hurt and no other guards off the bench, we need to run those guys 40 minutes in the playoffs. They're healthy right now and as you said, there's no reason to save guys at this point.


I agree 100% with everything Chillbongo said about Meeks. Spot on!
nthydro

 
Posts: 1385
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:13 pm

pound4pound1 wrote:anyone else here just sigh the moment you see Meeks jack up an open shot?


I want to punch him in his face everytime I see him missing a layup on fast brake situations, I just know an EPIC fail is on the way when he's on the brake with a defender in his way.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10404
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby pound4pound1 on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:27 pm

khmrP wrote:
pound4pound1 wrote:anyone else here just sigh the moment you see Meeks jack up an open shot?


I want to punch him in his face everytime I see him missing a layup on fast brake situations, I just know an EPIC fail is on the way when he's on the brake with a defender in his way.



LOL...once he gets in that full sprint, the epic fail is a guarantee
.
Jerry Buss wrote:One of the biggest reasons I bought the Lakers was to beat the Celtics …..you just got it into your soul that you couldn't stand the Celtics anymore
User avatar
pound4pound1

 
Posts: 6296
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:47 am
Location: 818 LAKER NATION

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Punk-101 on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:47 pm

Here's Streaky Meeky's 3pt FGM-FGA from every game this year:

1-3
1-1
0-1
1-5
0-4
0-1
1-2
1-3
0-2
3-6
2-5
3-5
0-3
7-8
1-2
1-5
3-6
2-4
3-6
1-4
2-9
4-7
2-8
5-12
2-7
0-4
1-5
3-6
1-4
2-8
2-5
3-7
0-1
0-2
1-2
1-2
1-2
1-2
3-8
2-7
1-2
1-4
1-5

4-4
2-3
1-4
2-4
1-3
2-6
2-4
4-9
0-1
0-3
1-5
0-1
3-5
2-7
1-4
1-6
3-8
2-5
0-4
2-4
1-5
1-2
1-2
2-6
1-7
0-2
Image
“Action has meaning only in relationship; and without understanding relationship, action on any level will only breed conflict. The understanding of relationship is infinitely more important than the search for any plan of action.”
-Jiddu Krishnamurti
User avatar
Punk-101

 
Posts: 13242
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 3:24 pm
Location: Orange, CA

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:52 pm

^^^hard to call him streaky when he normally doesn't follow up a great shooting night with another the very next game, most streak guys are at least good for 2-3 games at a time.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10404
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Punk-101 on Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:55 pm

khmrP wrote:^^^hard to call him streaky when he normally doesn't follow up a great shooting night with another the very next game, most streak guys are at least good for 2-3 games at a time.

Hey, the adjectives like crappy, sucky, and s****y don't rhyme. :man10:
Image
“Action has meaning only in relationship; and without understanding relationship, action on any level will only breed conflict. The understanding of relationship is infinitely more important than the search for any plan of action.”
-Jiddu Krishnamurti
User avatar
Punk-101

 
Posts: 13242
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 3:24 pm
Location: Orange, CA

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby JSM on Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:17 pm

As soon as he can put 100% of the weight on leg, he can start hobbling his way out of LA.

Image
User avatar
JSM
ClubLakers.com Administrator
 
Posts: 93983
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 3:40 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby JSM on Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:34 pm

Mike Trudell ‏@LakersReporter 2m
Official: Jodie Meeks (sprained L ankle) is OUT tonight. Look for Goudelock/Morris to play minutes at backup 2. Blake will start.

Well, at least he won't miss any shots tonight.
User avatar
JSM
ClubLakers.com Administrator
 
Posts: 93983
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 3:40 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Doc Brown on Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:44 pm

Who's going to miss all our layups?
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19415
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby JSM on Wed Apr 24, 2013 9:53 pm

KEVIN DING ‏@KevinDing 54s
Meeks (ankle) will have an MRI Friday.
User avatar
JSM
ClubLakers.com Administrator
 
Posts: 93983
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 3:40 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Doc Brown on Wed Apr 24, 2013 9:59 pm

Doc Brown @FluxCapacitor

Meeks (career) will have his team option declined as soon as Monday.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19415
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

PreviousNext

Return to NBA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lets Go Lakers, nluna75, scissors, seasonVet24, silver0187, SK8 and 20 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.