Andrew Goudelock Waived: no longer a Laker (pg 23)

1. Goudelock is not a PG
2. He is the only consistent scoring option we've found off the bench, why start him?
3. Blake has been solid this season, why are you bashing him?

therealdeal wrote:1. Goudelock is not a PG
2. He is the only consistent scoring option we've found off the bench, why start him?
3. Blake has been solid this season, why are you bashing him?

blake has been solid but both goudelock and blake are better with the ball in their hands. one should be starting. i will say that goudelock can definitely do more with the ball in his hands than blake. for a veteran blake is playing waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to tentative

last stand wrote:

therealdeal wrote:1. Goudelock is not a PG
2. He is the only consistent scoring option we've found off the bench, why start him?
3. Blake has been solid this season, why are you bashing him?

blake has been solid but both goudelock and blake are better with the ball in their hands. one should be starting. i will say that goudelock can definitely do more with the ball in his hands than blake. for a veteran blake is playing waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to tentative

This whole "Glock is better with the ball in his hands" mantra is growing old. He scored 7 points in Toronto in 16 minutes. He scored 10 points against Atlanta in 14 minutes. Both with Blake on the floor with him. The only reason he struggled in the first 2 games with Blake back is because potatohead played him only 8 minutes against Boston and NY.

therealdeal wrote:1. Goudelock is not a PG
2. He is the only consistent scoring option we've found off the bench, why start him?
3. Blake has been solid this season, why are you bashing him?

This, and not only that, Goudelock is just not a good enough ball handler to be a point guard. If he is going to get significant minutes at the 1, teams will pounce on that and play pressure D. He is playing the position he should be playing now that Blake is back, which is backup shooting guard.

I would like to see him on the floor with Kobe at the 3 a lot more though, that would space the floor a lot more for Kobe and the bigs.

therealdeal wrote:1. Goudelock is not a PG
2. He is the only consistent scoring option we've found off the bench, why start him?
3. Blake has been solid this season, why are you bashing him?

1. Goudelock doesn't have the court vision to run an offense. His initial thought is look for a score.
2. Yes he is. Him playing with Blake spaces the floor plus he can create off the dribble with those floaters.
3. If Blake hadn't been injured, I would believe there'd be two to three more in the "W" column.

He has potential but he seems to be a shooter and doesn't seem to possess the basketball iq, ball handling skills, or court vision to be a pg. He will never be a formidable floor general to say the least. I would say in this league he will be a back up pg at BEST, and that's being nice considering his MAJOR flaws and shortcomings for his position. You just can't be a pg, not even a average one, while lacking all the most important and major things that define what a pg is.

My guess is he will end up being a 3rd-4th stringer pg/wannabe sg for the rest of his career. If he was a legit SG that would be another story but again, he lacks the tools to be a legit SG as well, including his physical attributes(height/body). He seems to be more of a broken combo guard than anything, which is in short words, very disappointing.

He is a scorer. His role when he's in the game is to score points. He's already very good at that.

Dude has a shoe deal

http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2012/02/andrew-goudelock-wearing-shoes-with-chinese-greeting.html

LOL @ his pull-up 3-pointer when he could've just drove and dunked. He's definitely confident in his shot. Even though he missed that one, I like that his bricks never shake his confidence. His stroke is good enough that he SHOULDN'T ever doubt it.

LOL that 3 pointer...he knew he was coming out for Kobe so he was out to get his and had a smirk on his face on his way out haha

That floater is money , would like to see his FG% when using it ... I've noticed he's wide open at the 3pt line quite a lot through the different games but Blake misses him on a regular basis

wcsoldier81 wrote:That floater is money , would like to see his FG% when using it ... I've noticed he's wide open at the 3pt line quite a lot through the different games but Blake misses him on a regular basis

That floater is pretty amazing. I like the kid a lot. As much as I love seeing him light it up from distance I hope he keeps going teams with the drive, too. He's got the tools to be a really good offensive player, and he's pretty hard nosed on D as well. Another nice pick by Mitch who seems to be underrated in that department.

Lakerjones wrote:

wcsoldier81 wrote:That floater is money , would like to see his FG% when using it ... I've noticed he's wide open at the 3pt line quite a lot through the different games but Blake misses him on a regular basis

That floater is pretty amazing. I like the kid a lot. As much as I love seeing him light it up from distance I hope he keeps going teams with the drive, too. He's got the tools to be a really good offensive player, and he's pretty hard nosed on D as well. Another nice pick by Mitch who seems to be underrated in that department.

+100 on the floater. It's like a freaking free throw for him anywhere inside that line. Has to be above 80%....no? Where's a stat person when you need them. Where can this be found??

^A floater is a difficult shot to pull off and he seems to have the right touch for it. Lantz often mentions how it drives "bigs" crazy.

Goudelock and the Three Bears. Still makes me laugh whoever coined that up.

Not gonna lie...that floater of his is unmolested fresh snow cash money in the lane.

In 11.6 MPpg Goudelock is averaging 4.9 PTSpg. In 22.6 MPpg, MWP is averaging 4.8 PTSpg. SAD man.

I get that Brown is trying to bring a bit more defense to the second unit by supplanting Murph and Goudelock with McBob and MWP, but I feel like we could use at least one consistent three point threat out there to space the floor and open up some room in the lane and my vote goes to Goudelock. The extra D is nice but unfortunately it comes at the expense of a consistent deep threat and a lack of spacing. Barnes has picked up his 3P% recently and if he proves to be consistent then it may not be such a big deal, but playing Goudelock also cuts down on the number of minutes Bryant, Barnes and MWP are forced to play as well.

dammit let this guy play least he has balls unlike Blake

He's actually losing time to Barnes.

Barnes is playing SG lately with MWP and we're getting a crazy strong defensively lineup. Since acquiring Sessions, Barnes is 8/17 from downtown which is 47%. I don't think he can keep up that kind of shooting, but even if he dips 10% that's good enough to do damage and space the floor.

Barnes may make Goudelock unnecessary.

^^^I'm sure Glock can play along side Sessions, the 2nd unit should be the different pace/faster team, Artest doesn't fit that mold with Bynum as the core guy with 2nd unit we need floor spacers.....I think Barnes will be effective regardless of playing 3 or 2. I would play Hill too, next to Bynum if we have Glock/Barnes spreading the floor for Bynum.

GLOCK was playing well with Blake in the second unit. When the natural order comes to what it should be, with Sessions out there as a starter and playing 35 minutes a game, GLOCK will work once again with Blake and the second unit.

We shouldn't be holding Sessions back. Get him going with the starters and let's see the best Laker team possible on the floor for the majority of the game. GLOCK is a good fit out there with Blake off the bench. 13 minutes a game for Blake and 11-13 for GLOCK would be good stuff for the rest of the regular season and would bring down Kobe's minutes.

Barnes should be splitting minutes evenly with MWP - that means time with Sessions and the
starters, and with Blake.

If they get the PG minutes right everything else falls into place, including GLOCK. The bigs can be subbed as needed depending on match-ups and foul situations with Pau and Bynum. We've got three guys to do the job, each with a different skill set. Well, McBobs and Hill are similar enough, but Murphy is quite different with the long range shooting.

Yeah Barnes , MWP and Drew anchoring the paint ain't no joke ... fortunately for the other team , there is McBob or Alf at the 4 ... at the beginning of the season , we could have put a all time worst 5 defensive team on the floor , Fish, Krapono, Luke, Mcbob and Alf

Lakerjones wrote:GLOCK was playing well with Blake in the second unit. When the natural order comes to what it should be, with Sessions out there as a starter and playing 35 minutes a game, GLOCK will work once again with Blake and the second unit.

We shouldn't be holding Sessions back. Get him going with the starters and let's see the best Laker team possible on the floor for the majority of the game. GLOCK is a good fit out there with Blake off the bench. 13 minutes a game for Blake and 11-13 for GLOCK would be good stuff for the rest of the regular season and would bring down Kobe's minutes.

Barnes should be splitting minutes evenly with MWP - that means time with Sessions and the
starters, and with Blake.

If they get the PG minutes right everything else falls into place, including GLOCK. The bigs can be subbed as needed depending on match-ups and foul situations with Pau and Bynum. We've got three guys to do the job, each with a different skill set. Well, McBobs and Hill are similar enough, but Murphy is quite different with the long range shooting.

Ideally this would happen:
Sessions (35)/ Blake (13)
Bryant (35)/ Goudelock (13)
Artest (30)/ Barnes (18)
Gasol (35)/ McRoberts (13)
Bynum (35)/ Murphy or Hill (13)

When Blake is in the game, I hope Goudelock is always in. Blake is too timid to contribute offensively as far as scoring. Goudelock isn't afraid of anything and he'd be the best fit next to Blake. Barnes can play effectively at SG with MWP at SF for most stretches, especially with Sessions on the floor. McRoberts can be effective now with Sessions running the show. Hill or Murphy should be used conditionally depending on matchups.

I wish he had just a little bit more handle and a bit more in the way of being able to create for others as he'd be the perfect replacement for Blake IMO given how much KGB dominate the ball offensively. Goudelock would be the perfect floor spacer for the first unit and we all know he ain't scurred. If he could improve those two areas of his game he'd be perfect alongside the starters IMO.

bruddahmanmatt wrote:I wish he had just a little bit more handle and a bit more in the way of being able to create for others as he'd be the perfect replacement for Blake IMO given how much KGB dominate the ball offensively. Goudelock would be the perfect floor spacer for the first unit and we all know he ain't scurred. If he could improve those two areas of his game he'd be perfect alongside the starters IMO.

Some games I really wouldn't mind Glock getting all of Blake's minutes. And by some games I mean a majority of them. Glock's offense is better and he can create for himself. Blake's defense isn't what's making us a great defensive team, so the drop off there would be minimal.

Blake is slowly slipping to the point of just being a spot up shooter with this team.