because all this talk bout the team liking his character and he has Kobe respect doesn't translate to much of a positive impact on the court,
How much court time do you expect our 3rd string SG/SF to have? Honestly? Do you expect to see him out there for 5 minutes every single game? 3 minutes? How often does a team's 3rd string option even see the court for anyone to honestly be upset or care about their production? Will he play as much as Sacre did last season? Will he play as much as Meeks? I mean really, the guy would be so far behind the rotation that the only thing that REALLY matters on a consistent basis is whether or not he's helping the team in practice. And given that he'd be a proven NBA entity (unlike Harris who you hate, but want to replace with a proven NBA entity), I think he'd make a fine 3rd stringer on this team. Most teams don't have 3rd stingers like that.
khmrP wrote: he may have complied by the teams request but looking terrible doing it should be a factor.
All things relative. Here's something from the Lakers.com site in regards to Douglas-Roberts:
CDR SHOWS A DIVERSIFIED GAME
Perhaps the best example of sacrificing his own game for the betterment of the team came from Chris Douglas-Roberts*, a proven scorer at the NBA level – he averaged 17 points for the Nets for over a month when given minutes – who did much more than that in Vegas. At 6-7 with a nice handle, CDR can free himself for jumpers or get to the rim, but he attempted only 32 shots in five games, tied for fifth on the team, instead focusing on playing as a point forward and facilitating for others (his nine assists ranked second to point guard Lester Hudson's 16). Douglas-Roberts also used his length and quickness to be disruptive on D, helping him build a robust individual plus/minus of +42 for the tournament. He wanted to show teams that he could do more than just score, and he did so.*If you want to hear from CDR himself, we recorded an hour-plus long podcast with him.
So why did he look terrible? Because he didn't dominate the ball and average 25/5/5? That wasn't asked of him. In the D-League last season he averaged 27.8 points 5.4 rebounds and 3.6 assists. That's not even a year ago. He still is absolutely capable of doing what he's been known to do on the floor, he was simply asked to do something else. And relative to the team and to the team's success he did a good job of it.
khmrP wrote:As far as I'm concerned the 3rd F is Harris,
There's such a thing as a SF/PF tweener. Reference: LeBron, Carmelo, etc. Guys with a SF body that play PF because the teams speed up the game. And that's YOUR opinion, not the team's. AND who is to say that he'll ever see playing time anyway? He'll play behind Young, Johnson, Bryant, Gasol, Hill, and Kelly. That's a lot of bodies to wait behind.
khmrP wrote: he's NOT a PF and if we gona use him as such our D will pretty much suck even more, as per his draft weakness, he already has problem guarding "slow" players and has a lot of defensive lapses and has trouble guarding post players.
I have read his draft profile and that's not at all what I've heard. What I've heard is that he has a tendency to over work outside and thus gets caught using his hands instead of his feet. He's lost weight to help alleviate that pressure and if you watched him in the Summer League it shows. It still has a ton of work to do, but that doesn't mean he won't be able to defend slow PFs in the NBA. And again, he won't be playing so who cares?
khmrP wrote:Those are horrible remarks for a player even as a backup and I know he'll play eventually because Hill, Kaman, even Pau are due to miss chunks of games sooner or later.
Do you often read draft profiles? Most of them are entirely negative. Every player has faults. It also states that Harris has an NBA ready body and will likely be ready to rebound at this level because he works hard on the glass. He also has soft hands, a decent touch around the rim, and a recovering outside shot that was over 40% two out of his four years in college. Anyone can go through and read the negative reports about a player and paint a bad picture. That's easy.
Not to mention for the 4th time: he won't play much anyway. We're signing a prospect, not a star. Your expectations don't make sense.