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

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby BuzzerBeater on Sun Apr 21, 2013 3:49 pm

The Rock wrote:He hustles though. We need to platoon him with a guy who can actually shoot because he tries hard as hell, goes after loose balls, defends with everything hes got even though he can be ineffective sometiems. He earns the minimum I think, keep him around for that price but we gotta have another shooter on the team


We have a better shooter...Metta 3/14 today.

Meeks & Metta should pass the ball everytime they get it. :freak2:
User avatar
BuzzerBeater

 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:37 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Doc Brown on Sun Apr 21, 2013 3:51 pm

The Rock wrote:He hustles though. We need to platoon him with a guy who can actually shoot because he tries hard as hell, goes after loose balls, defends with everything hes got even though he can be ineffective sometiems. He earns the minimum I think, keep him around for that price but we gotta have another shooter on the team


His defense is about as good as Morris'.....fake hustle.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby SpencerHarrison on Sun Apr 21, 2013 4:22 pm

Has. To. Hit. Shots. Meeks can do whatever he wants on defense, but he is totally without value if he can't hit 2 or 3 triples a game. That's his job. When you've got Pau and D12 able to post, you know the looks will come. Just set and shoot.

IF Jodie can drop a few more shots, LA could steal some games in this series.
SpencerHarrison

 
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:41 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Sun Apr 21, 2013 11:04 pm

SpencerHarrison wrote:Has. To. Hit. Shots. Meeks can do whatever he wants on defense, but he is totally without value if he can't hit 2 or 3 triples a game. That's his job. When you've got Pau and D12 able to post, you know the looks will come. Just set and shoot.

IF Jodie can drop a few more shots, LA could steal some games in this series.


he made one basket and that was off an offensive reb so yea we need more than just a "few" shots. Dude is just horrendous, can always count on this guy to look like he has no business being in the league when he tries his 1 man fast brake and airball layup attempts.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Ariza3 on Sun Apr 21, 2013 11:09 pm

if meeks isnt hitting 3's put in glock or duhon. defense is gunna be sketch but those guys are just as good 3 point shooters. glock has that floater too and duhon is an okay pg with good vision.

defense is bad at the 2 spot unless blake is there. so meeks glock or duhon is capable of playing it as a backup and if one isnt making shots try another.

give glock a chance
Image
User avatar
Ariza3

 
Posts: 4711
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:28 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Sun Apr 21, 2013 11:18 pm

The Rock wrote:He hustles though. We need to platoon him with a guy who can actually shoot because he tries hard as hell, goes after loose balls, defends with everything hes got even though he can be ineffective sometiems. He earns the minimum I think, keep him around for that price but we gotta have another shooter on the team

he's not very good defensively and he was brought here for shooting, if he's not making shots why do we need him if we get another "shooter"? He doesn't earn the MIN, he got half of the mini MLE, its close to his MIN but as of late he's not even worth his cheap contract.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby therealdeal on Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:01 am

I can't defend the kid anymore if he can't make a shot. I love the energy, I love the work, but just like Vujacic when the chips are down you HAVE to make baskets.

He'll be back next season, but hopefully we can find a lesser role for him and we can bring in someone who will actually make shots.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Armani on Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:11 am

therealdeal wrote:I can't defend the kid anymore if he can't make a shot. I love the energy, I love the work, but just like Vujacic when the chips are down you HAVE to make baskets.

He'll be back next season, but hopefully we can find a lesser role for him and we can bring in someone who will actually make shots.


This pretty much. I dig this guy, but when he's not hitting his 3's... what's he good for? This seems to be a trend with him, too.
Image
User avatar
Armani

 
Posts: 1927
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby dwighthowardsdad on Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:15 am

Personally, I'm tired of Meeks. He's way too inconsistent.
dwighthowardsdad

 
Posts: 1695
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:31 am

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Doc Brown on Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:29 am

I'd rather have the guy that shoots 2/5 every game from 3 consistently at the worst, than Meeks who will shoot 0/3 one game and then 1/3 the next, then 3/3 the next and then back to 0/3 the next game.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:33 am

Meeks is consistent, just not in a good way.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby lotus on Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:08 am

He needs to stop hustling trying to be a complete player because maybe that is tiring him out from being able to shoot the 3 ball. Just be the deadly shooter from the arc that you were signed to be.
lotus

 
Posts: 1902
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 8:15 am

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:16 am

lotus wrote:He needs to stop hustling trying to be a complete player because maybe that is tiring him out from being able to shoot the 3 ball. Just be the deadly shooter from the arc that you were signed to be.


he missed his 1st 3 badly minutes into the game, so no he's not bricking shots cause he's tired......he just SUCKS.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby GoldenKnight on Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:16 am

Can't hit an open shot, or a shot in general to save his life! Thinks he can drive the ball on a 1 on 3 fastbreak, fouls every single time someone drives past him...what's the point of having this guy in the game, honestly?
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 lakerfan2 on Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:27 am

Yeah, I'm done with Meeks too. Love the heart and hustle, but we got you for one reason.

I mean, damn, he's missin completely wide open jumpers. There's no excuse for that.
#OURHOUSE
User avatar
lakerfan2

 
Posts: 9914
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby jlkr on Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:58 am

Say what you want ... the team have held the Spurs to 89 ppg and 37% shooting the last two games they've played. They came out on fire for game 1 and still only scored 6 more points than they did in the loss last week. Doing that to the Spurs' offense should ordinarily keep the Lakers in the game. In other words, Meeks' defense is not the issue his shooting is.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

--Robert Frost
User avatar
jlkr

 
Posts: 4199
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: your friendly neighborhood bar

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby The Rock on Mon Apr 22, 2013 12:03 pm

He can put weight on his ankle apparently. WELP
Image

Props to sidthekid871
User avatar
The Rock
CL Twitter Team
 
Posts: 19996
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:10 pm
Location: Smackdown Hotel

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Congo Cash on Mon Apr 22, 2013 12:57 pm

All hustle and nothing else to show for it...
- insert signature here -
User avatar
Congo Cash

 
Posts: 4532
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:58 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby khmrP on Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:13 pm

^^^^Sasha and Madsen reborn
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby Chillbongo on Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:13 pm

We're short handed but damn so much discussion for a guy making 1-2% of our payroll. Who's known to be a niche player. If his niche isn't effective we know he's not doing much else for us.

It's on MDA to play other guys. Why was did Clark and Jamison play a combined 28 minutes . Why is Nash playing 30 minutes? Why is Nash starting? Why is MWP playing 32 minutes? So many questions....
User avatar
Chillbongo

 
Posts: 3242
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Jodie Meeks Discussion: Defensive Liability

Postby therealdeal on Mon Apr 22, 2013 2:45 pm

Because Clark and Jamison couldn't hit the broadside of a barn AND they were getting out hustled.

Because if Nash doesn't play 30 minutes, we get to see Duhon/Morris play.

No one plays behind World Peace. That "workout" chart should show why Ebanks doesn't get any playing time.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

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: 3242
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: 40322
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: 10461
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: 3242
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

PreviousNext

Return to NBA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media, Vassallo and 11 guests

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