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

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby Lakerjones on Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:01 am

therealdeal wrote:
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.


Basically I completely agree realdeal, especially about Glock basically being in all the time Blake is in to give them a real threat from outside who isn't afraid to pull the trigger.

The only difference between our projected lineups is that I would love to see Barnes split minutes evenly with Artest - 24 and 24. Especially because Sessions and Barnes play so well together - I'd like to see Barnes get more minutes with the starters. Artest and Barnes to me are a great platoon unit - they have different strengths but are pretty complementary. Now with Barnes showing confidence in his three pointer when in the game with Sessions, I'd like to see that out there with Kobe Pau and Bynum to stretch the floor. Artest still makes me cringe from long distance. He can hit a couple of them if he's feeling it, but it's pretty bad.

I think 24 minutes for both Barnes and Artest would be perfect.
Lakerjones
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 15234
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby therealdeal on Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:36 am

I agree on paper but the problem is Artest. Remember earlier in the year he blasted Brown for not playing him enough? I think that mentally Artest couldn't handle having reduced minutes again. And considering how much better Artest has been since he's been given the starting job and 30 minutes a game or so, I don't want to risk losing him mentally again.

That's why you've seen Barnes playing the 2 recently. Barnes has been too effective not to play him, so he needs minutes somewhere. The problem is finding them. In my little graph there I showed Barnes getting minutes behind Artest when really he'd be getting minutes behind Kobe and Glock is getting minutes behind Artest if that makes sense.

Basically the lineups look like this:
start 1st:
Sessions/Bryant/Artest/Gasol/Bryant

1st sub:
Sessions/Bryant/Barnes/Murphy/Bynum

2nd sub:
Blake/Goudelock/Barnes/Murphy/Gasol

3rd:
Sessions/Barnes/Artest/Murphy/Gasol

Something like that anyway. Barnes is going to be playing a 2/3 in the offense allowing him to remain in the game as necessary. Goudelock still comes in, but when he does Artest isn't on the floor anymore. Meanwhile, Barnes can run with either unit as the 2 or the 3 depending on matchups.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40357
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby Lakerjones on Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:46 am

^^ Hmmm. I like the way your sub breakdown looks for sure realdeal. I agree with that pretty much all the way. But I still think Barnes should split minutes with Ron. Ron can keep the starting job and probably the finishing job.

But Barnes needs to be rewarded for good play and so does Sessions. Sessions in 35 mpg, Barnes 24. 18 is too little given what he's doing right now. Ride the hot hand.

Artest shouldn't be catered to. As a player you have to fall in line, and I think he was more irked by losing the starting job than anything. He and Barnes need to be played as a tandem. They are both vets and can handle it.

Of course, it can also be somewhat situational, especially in the playoffs. If we're playing vs. Durant or vs. Lebronze of course I want to see more Artest than Barnes. He's just a better defender against those guys.
Lakerjones
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 15234
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby LakerBoyz24 on Fri Mar 23, 2012 1:03 am

Doc Brown wrote:
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.


Yup agreed, but there's little room for Glock in the NBA as a very undersized SG(at 6'2/6'3 he is a nice and above avg size for a PG) who can't create for himself, and doesn't have good ballhandling/dribbling skills. If he doesn't even have the ballhandling skills or the skill to create for himself at the SG position, that makes him a even worse fit for the PG position. PG has to be able to ISO/create for themselves when needed, create for others, and be able to drive or have a floater at least a bit at the very least. That's only a few main parts, and he can't do any of that.

He is a really half-assed wannabe-SG, since a real SG can create of the dribble/create for himself, drive well, has good ball-handling skills, and is a lot more versatile and WAY bigger, to say the least(once again, only a few main parts of being a SG but he can't do any of that either). All he does well atm is being a spot up shooter, and there's tons of better one-dimensional spot up shooters than him in the NBA. I think I'm being a bit hard on the little guy, but that's the reality of the situation for Glock.
LakerBoyz24

 
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:43 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby LTLakerFan on Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:02 am

^^^^ Glock can't create for himself.....? Doesn't have a floater at least a bit.....? :man3: :man3:
LTLakerFan

 
Posts: 6486
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:44 pm
Location: SoCal

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby Doc Brown on Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:22 am

LTLakerFan wrote:^^^^ Glock can't create for himself.....? Doesn't have a floater at least a bit.....? :man3: :man3:


LOL. Yea I read his response and to be honest I was lost after, "Yup Agreed". :man10:
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19457
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby The Rock on Fri Mar 23, 2012 12:28 pm

Mike needs to find this kid minutes. He spaces the floor, he can shoot the 3. Thats still a huge weakness on this team. Mike has the resources to address it, he better use it
Image

Props to sidthekid871
User avatar
The Rock
CL Twitter Team
 
Posts: 19992
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:10 pm
Location: Smackdown Hotel

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby 24K GOLD on Fri Mar 23, 2012 12:44 pm

Can we run Ramon/Glock
I'm joining the communist now.. I don't like World peace...

Image
User avatar
24K GOLD

 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:41 am
Location: Camp Nou

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby Finwë on Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:41 pm

therealdeal wrote:I agree on paper but the problem is Artest. Remember earlier in the year he blasted Brown for not playing him enough? I think that mentally Artest couldn't handle having reduced minutes again. And considering how much better Artest has been since he's been given the starting job and 30 minutes a game or so, I don't want to risk losing him mentally again.

That's why you've seen Barnes playing the 2 recently. Barnes has been too effective not to play him, so he needs minutes somewhere. The problem is finding them. In my little graph there I showed Barnes getting minutes behind Artest when really he'd be getting minutes behind Kobe and Glock is getting minutes behind Artest if that makes sense.

Basically the lineups look like this:
start 1st:
Sessions/Bryant/Artest/Gasol/Bryant

1st sub:
Sessions/Bryant/Barnes/Murphy/Bynum

2nd sub:
Blake/Goudelock/Barnes/Murphy/Gasol


3rd:
Sessions/Barnes/Artest/Murphy/Gasol

Something like that anyway. Barnes is going to be playing a 2/3 in the offense allowing him to remain in the game as necessary. Goudelock still comes in, but when he does Artest isn't on the floor anymore. Meanwhile, Barnes can run with either unit as the 2 or the 3 depending on matchups.


The actual 2nd sub lineup we have now (last 3 games)is:
Blake/MWP/Barnes/McRoberts/Bynum

I really dislike that lineup. Talk about clogged lanes and lack of spacing. Defensively, we can't argue it's very good, but offensively it's just awful.

Why mwp AND barnes? Why that + McRoberts? Why not Murphy to better space the floor?

Speaking of that, I've noticed Brown has been playing McRoberts with Bynum and Gasol with Murphy. To me that's just stupid.
Murphy should play with Bynum, he spaces the floor with his shooting and gives Bynum a little more room to operate. Defensively he's poor, but Bynum is great.
The same for McRoberts, he should play with Pau, who doesn't need spacing that much, and McRoberts isn't a shooter. McRoberts brings rebounding and defense, areas where Pau hasn't been that good lately.
"The first time I ever saw my uniform hanging in the locker I put it on right away, and it just felt like I was putting on golden armour. From that day forward, I just called it 'the golden armour', it just felt like there was something mystical and magical about it" - Kobe Bryant.
User avatar
Finwë

 
Posts: 8079
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:32 pm

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby tigerjeterkobe on Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:55 am

He can space the floor, but he cannot defend at all. We need a back up 2 like Crawford or or S. Williams -- someone who can actually put pressure on the other team's back-up 2 to tire them defensively, and have a decent chance at defending them.

We plugged the hole at PG. Now the back up SG is our biggest problem, bigger than the SF issues.

This is why -- the back-up SGs we will face in the playoffs are VERY VERY good -- and Glock has NO CHANCE at slowing any of them down.


Crawford
Mayo
Harden
Manu
Mo Williams
Jet

Scary list -- ALL OFF THE BENCH. Glock is not ready for these playoff matchups. We should have taken a chance on Gilbert or Williams.
tigerjeterkobe

 
Posts: 1772
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:30 pm
Location: Buffalo

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby bruddahmanmatt on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 am

tigerjeterkobe wrote:He can space the floor, but he cannot defend at all. We need a back up 2 like Crawford or or S. Williams -- someone who can actually put pressure on the other team's back-up 2 to tire them defensively, and have a decent chance at defending them.

We plugged the hole at PG. Now the back up SG is our biggest problem, bigger than the SF issues.

This is why -- the back-up SGs we will face in the playoffs are VERY VERY good -- and Glock has NO CHANCE at slowing any of them down.


Crawford
Mayo
Harden
Manu
Mo Williams
Jet

Scary list -- ALL OFF THE BENCH. Glock is not ready for these playoff matchups. We should have taken a chance on Gilbert or Williams.


You're worried about defense and you wish we had gone after Gilbert? :man3:
P&G
bruddahmanmatt

 
Posts: 12220
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby tigerjeterkobe on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:31 am

He is a better defender that Glock -- stonger and bigger. And won't be afraid of the moments in the playoffs.

Hard to trust a rookie against that list above. Those are mostly borderline all-stars, 6th men off the bench, and each plays starters minutes.

Too bad we couldn't swing Crawford -- his offense helps make up for his defenses because it wears the other SG out trying to defend him.

Going into the playoffs with Blake and Glock against those studs above is not good. That is all I am saying.

I wish they would give williams a shot.
Last edited by tigerjeterkobe on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
tigerjeterkobe

 
Posts: 1772
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:30 pm
Location: Buffalo

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby bruddahmanmatt on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:37 am

tigerjeterkobe wrote:He is a better defender that Glock


Let me just stop you right there...no...he is not.
P&G
bruddahmanmatt

 
Posts: 12220
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby tigerjeterkobe on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:41 am

Yes, you are right. Your word is gospel. :disagree:


Let's go with the undersized rookie against Harden, Manu, and Mayo.

Oh yeah, we won't do that. He will be on the bench, and we will go with Artest at the 2 during those stretches, killing our offense.

We will see Gil tonight.
tigerjeterkobe

 
Posts: 1772
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:30 pm
Location: Buffalo

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby bruddahmanmatt on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:50 am

tigerjeterkobe wrote:Yes, you are right. Your word is gospel. :disagree:


Let's go with the undersized rookie against Harden, Manu, and Mayo.

Oh yeah, we won't do that. He will be on the bench, and we will go with Artest at the 2 during those stretches, killing our offense.

We will see Gil tonight.


It has nothing to do with "going with an undersized rookie" against those guys, you stated that Arenas is better than Goudelock at the defensive end, he is not. He's never been a great defender even when he was healthy and ever since his knee injury he's been awful in that regard. FWIW Goudelock isn't the best defender in the world either, but he hustles and has just enough athleticism to do an ok job of staying in front of his man, Gilbert does not. Both guys are undersized so going over them isn't a problem for taller guards.

BTW Gilbert's offense is so awful that even if the extra inch in height he has on Goudelock were to make a difference at the defensive end, he'd give it all away at the other end of the floor when it came time to score. Arenas is done.
P&G
bruddahmanmatt

 
Posts: 12220
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby therealdeal on Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:11 am

bruddahmanmatt wrote:
tigerjeterkobe wrote:Yes, you are right. Your word is gospel. :disagree:


Let's go with the undersized rookie against Harden, Manu, and Mayo.

Oh yeah, we won't do that. He will be on the bench, and we will go with Artest at the 2 during those stretches, killing our offense.

We will see Gil tonight.


It has nothing to do with "going with an undersized rookie" against those guys, you stated that Arenas is better than Goudelock at the defensive end, he is not. He's never been a great defender even when he was healthy and ever since his knee injury he's been awful in that regard. FWIW Goudelock isn't the best defender in the world either, but he hustles and has just enough athleticism to do an ok job of staying in front of his man, Gilbert does not. Both guys are undersized so going over them isn't a problem for taller guards.

BTW Gilbert's offense is so awful that even if the extra inch in height he has on Goudelock were to make a difference at the defensive end, he'd give it all away at the other end of the floor when it came time to score. Arenas is done.

Besides, the backup 2 guard on the floor has been Matt Barnes and he's been very effective. He's a good defender and his outside shot has been working since Ramon has been setting him up.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40357
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby bruddahmanmatt on Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:33 am

therealdeal wrote:
bruddahmanmatt wrote:
tigerjeterkobe wrote:Yes, you are right. Your word is gospel. :disagree:


Let's go with the undersized rookie against Harden, Manu, and Mayo.

Oh yeah, we won't do that. He will be on the bench, and we will go with Artest at the 2 during those stretches, killing our offense.

We will see Gil tonight.


It has nothing to do with "going with an undersized rookie" against those guys, you stated that Arenas is better than Goudelock at the defensive end, he is not. He's never been a great defender even when he was healthy and ever since his knee injury he's been awful in that regard. FWIW Goudelock isn't the best defender in the world either, but he hustles and has just enough athleticism to do an ok job of staying in front of his man, Gilbert does not. Both guys are undersized so going over them isn't a problem for taller guards.

BTW Gilbert's offense is so awful that even if the extra inch in height he has on Goudelock were to make a difference at the defensive end, he'd give it all away at the other end of the floor when it came time to score. Arenas is done.

Besides, the backup 2 guard on the floor has been Matt Barnes and he's been very effective. He's a good defender and his outside shot has been working since Ramon has been setting him up.


I know what Brown is trying to do there but man, sometimes I wish he'd toss in one of Goudelock or Murph. We're fortunate in that Barnes has been hot lately, and if his shooting doesn't tail off then great, I'm just not sure if he'll be able to keep it up over the long haul.

I still think it's funny that despite the fact we've found our starting PG we're now in need of a quality backup. It's amazing how our problems at the 3 were seemingly cured by a huge upgrade at the 1. In a way I'm glad we didn't end up with Beasley.
P&G
bruddahmanmatt

 
Posts: 12220
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby davriver290 on Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:38 am

Goudelock should still get at least a ten minute run. Guy has proved to us (without Sessions here) that he can play. A bit of a liability on defense, but dude's got the floater, and stroke.
Sessions, Kobe, Metta, Gasol, Bynum
User avatar
davriver290

 
Posts: 5711
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:14 pm

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby tigerjeterkobe on Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:33 pm

What are the mental issues with the williams kid?

Barnes is looking good, but he will be out in stretches with Blake, and thus ineffective mostly. I am mostly thinking about that 10-12 minutes per game in the playoffs.

I disagree about Arenas. But it is not worth debating, since both are not good defensively.

The Williams kid who everything thinks is a cancer and idiot -- how is he defensively?
tigerjeterkobe

 
Posts: 1772
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:30 pm
Location: Buffalo

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby Center Court on Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:41 pm

I like seeing a group of Bynum/MbRoberts/Artest/Barnes/Session... all out D, hustle, energy. As impressive as gl0ck was for stretches, I think Barnes is better suited at the 2 unless we can't get any offense going
User avatar
Center Court

 
Posts: 3177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: @ CL since '04

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby nolQQkpass on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:15 pm

why isnt mike brown giving this guy any minutes. im sure he can produce more offense than blake. its not like blake can stop these pgs..
nolQQkpass

 
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 11:07 pm

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby lakersyunowin on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:18 pm

what did glock take a dump on mike's desk or something?
the artist formerly known as fklukewalton, fksteveblake, and fkmikebrown
User avatar
lakersyunowin

 
Posts: 10416
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:19 pm

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby 24K GOLD on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:19 pm

FREE GOUDELOCK!
I'm joining the communist now.. I don't like World peace...

Image
User avatar
24K GOLD

 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:41 am
Location: Camp Nou

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby Weezy on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:22 pm

So Glock had been coming in games all season long, giving us 5 to 7 points, hitting a 3 or 2 and maybe a runner each game to go with it, hustling out there, playing decent d staying in front of his man, I guess that earns you DNP Coach's Decision with a guy like Mike Brown. Great coaching Brown, let a guy play a role all year that he succeeds in, then just take it away for no reason. :man11:
User avatar
Weezy
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 50881
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Anaheim, CA

Re: Andrew Gl0ck/G-LOC Discussion Thread

Postby kray28 on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:22 pm

Glock isn't getting minutes at the 1....so that means if he's any getting minutes, it's at the 2. Which means after you take away the 35-40 minutes that Kobe plays...you got about 8-12 backup 2 minutes left. Those go to any combination of Blake/Barnes/Peace.
Image
User avatar
kray28

 
Posts: 21239
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

PreviousNext

Return to NBA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

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