The Lakers are probably going to be bad and that's okay

It's almost time for the start of the new NBA season and with it, a new era for the Los Angeles Lakers. For the first time in 20 years, the Lakers will field a team that does not include Kobe Bryant.

Bryant had achieved legendary status for the franchise due to his longevity, his almost unreal scoring ability, his five championship seasons and generally being an insane person that won a lot during his time here.

Because of those factors, this is more than just a new season for Los Angeles. It's a whole new beginning with a new system and fresh, young faces anchoring the team. It's certainly much more exciting than the Kobe Bryant Retirement Tour from last season, as the Lakers finally have a future to look forward to. Gone is Byron Scott and his refusal to use three pointers to his advantage. Gone is Bryant and his absurd usage percentage from last season. In their place, we have Luke Walton implementing a system fit for a modern NBA team, with the proper players to run said system.

With that said, this team is going to have a lot of growing pains. For starters, this team is astonishingly unproven. Luke Walton got rave reviews from nearly everyone in Golden State and he had an extremely impressive coaching record last season, filling in for Steve Kerr, who had taken some time off to heal from a nagging back injury. Walton led the Warriors to a 39-4 record before Kerr returned. That record is mighty impressive, especially for someone as inexperienced at coaching as Walton is, but we do have to question how much of that was Walton and how much of that was the Warriors being absurd last year.

Despite the fact that the Warriors blew a 3-1 lead in the Finals, they did still break the regular season record for wins in a season, ending with a 73-9 record. You have to figure there are going to be growing pains for him. Despite how much I like the core of D'Angelo Russell, Jordan Clarkson and Julius Randle, they aren't anywhere near as good as Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green.

Additionally, the talent on this team is immense, but very raw. D'Angelo Russell and rookie Brandon Ingram ooze potential and are likely going to be the cornerstones of the franchise going forward, but they're still very young; neither is old enough to buy a beer yet. Jordan Clarkson is a bit more mature at 24 years old, but he also has some question marks surrounding him. For starters, his defense has not exactly been up to standard the past couple seasons. There are questions as to how much farther he can develop, and if he was merely putting up good numbers on a sub-par team. Julius Randle showed flashes of potential last year, namely the fact that he's already rebounding at an elite rate, but was extremely rough around the edges with his finishing and decision making. Rookie Ivica Zubac looks like an absolute steal in the 2nd round of this year's draft and could potentially anchor the Lakers at center in the future, but he's going to be eased in because of how young and unproven he is.

The building blocks are there, it's just a matter of developing our young core properly. Thankfully, Walton already has some ideas on how to properly utilize each players strengths. Noticing a large drop off in quality of play between the starters and the bench, Walton is going to use Clarkson as the leader of the bench unit and the 6th man. This will be similar to Lamar Odom or Manu Ginobili and their respective roles as 6th men. It will help get both Russell and Clarkson more time with the ball, while significantly improving the bench unit.

Walton has also implemented a system built on screens, off-ball movement and crisp passing that is a much welcome change to the isolation heavy offense that Scott ran last year. As great as Kobe was over his 20 year career, he was a major reason the Lakers were so bad last season, as he was a complete black hole on both sides of the ball and the Lakers were obviously catering to him.

How good will this team be? Probably not very good. For the first time in a long time, the season won't be measured on wins and losses, but rather on how the Lakers win or lose. LA is okay with having another bad season, as long as the young core is taking strides to improve. A 30-52 record is fine, if Russell and co look good while doing so. It's going to be a bumpy road coming up, but for the first time in years, the team finally has something to look forward to.

Julius Randle scouting report

The Lakers had a lottery pick this year for the first time since the 2005 off season, where they picked Andrew Bynum, who was very good for the Lakers but hasn't done anything since being traded in the 2012 off season for Dwight Howard. Bynum has played 21 games in the past two seasons, being a member of the Philadelphia 76ers (0 games), Cleveland Cavaliers (24 games) and Indiana Pacers (2 games). The Lakers used the 7th overall pick in this years' NBA draft to select Kentucky power forward Julius Randle, who probably would have been the first overall pick in last years' draft (though, to be fair, everyone in the Top-7 of this years' draft would have been 1st overall in last years' awful draft class). Randle is a talented player, but will he be able to translate well into the pro's? Let's evaluate:

Physically, Randle has an NBA ready body, as he was one of the strongest players in the nation last season. He comes in at a bulky 6'9'', 250 pounds. By comparison, LeBron James is listed as 6'8'', 250 pounds. Apples and oranges, I know, so I compared him to a player with a very similar body type in Zach Randolph, who comes in at 6'9'', 260 pounds. So Randle can still put on a few pounds of muscle here and there, but he is, by all accounts, ready for the punishment of the low post in the NBA. Some scouts have said that Randle is too small, but the average power forward height from two years ago was 6'9.5'' and the average weight was 246 pounds. The landscape hasn't changed much since, which bodes well for Randle. What doesn't bode well for Randle, however, is his short wingspan; Randle is built like a T-rex, relative to NBA power forwards, as his wingspan has measured in between 6'11'' and 7 feet. Most big men in the NBA have wingspans in the 7'3'' to 7'5'' range and even Randolph (Randle's closest comparison in terms of body type) has a wingspan of 7'4''. Now, Randle is substantially more athletic than Randolph, as he is able to consistently play above the rim, while Randolph can barely dunk, but that doesn't mean I'm not worried about his lack of length going forward.

There are three starting power forwards in the NBA with sub-7 foot wingspans: Kevin Love, Blake Griffin and Thaddeus Young (all measured in at 6'11''). All three of them are substantially different from Randle, as Love is a master three point shooter and a great passer; Randle has neither of those skills. Griffin is a high flyer who doesn't only play above the rim, he practically plays in the rafters. While Randle is a very athletic guy, he will never be as athletic as Griffin. Young is a completely different beast altogether, as he is used as a small ball power forward, which is basically putting a small forward at power forward. All three of these guys are very talented players, which is to say that if Randle is good enough, there's no reason why his short wingspan will have a big negative impact on him. Whether or not he is that good is left to be seen.

This isn't saying that Randle doesn't stand a chance, but Randle will need to be put in the right situation to truly thrive. He is offensively talented and has a well polished post game, if he's going to his left hand. His right hand leaves a lot to be desired, but he has plenty of time to develop, seeing as he is only 19. He could still add a few moves to his arsenal, as his post game in college involved lots of bruising and sheer power, something he won't be able to consistently do in the NBA. He has good mechanics on his jump shot, but his shooting percentages from mid range are sub-par and he has shown nothing to indicate that he could shoot threes at all. He is a classic, back to the basket power forward. Randle will have difficulty defensively because of his short wingspan, as he simply cannot protect the rim (0.7 blocks per game in college), or pick pocket any big men in the low post (0.1 steals per game), therefore, Randle will not be able to be the one big man in a four perimeter player rotation because of bad defense. And, since Randle cannot stretch the floor, he can't be put with just any shot blocker because the spacing in the paint will be horrid. There aren't too many big men who can stretch the floor and are great shot blockers in the league and none of them are on the Lakers (though Jordan Hill certainly tried to improve on it last season). The absolute best situation for Randle would have been with guys like Serge Ibaka or Marc Gasol.

Now that he is on the Lakers, I do believe Byron Scott will see that Randle needs to develop a mid-range jumper to be able to play successfully in most rotations and, given his already pretty good mechanics, I think he will improve on it enough to be able to play with Hill/whomever the Lakers throw out at center. Randle is very energetic on all sides of the ball, and he has a nose for rebounds. He did average a double-double last season and I think his rebounding skills will translate well into the pro game, given his strength and rebounding fundamentals. Of all the prospects in this years' draft, Randle might be the most NBA ready player (alongside Duke's/Milwaukee's Jabari Parker), but he also probably has the lowest ceiling among the Top-7. That doesn't mean I think he'll be the worst of the bunch (I think Aaron Gordon will struggle the most), but it does mean that I don't think he will be lighting the league on fire as a top player. I do think he will be a good player because of the Lakers track record of success with lottery picks and his sheer talent.

Since 1979, the Lakers have picked in the top-10 a total of five times. With those picks, the Lakers have selected Magic Johnson (1979, 1st overall), James Worthy (1982, 1st overall), Eddie Jones (1994, 10th overall), Andrew Bynum (2005, 10th overall) and Julius Randle (2014, 7th overall). Of the four players that aren't Randle, two were great (Johnson, Worthy) and the other two were pretty good (Jones, Bynum). All four of those picks were good players, though not all of them were ready to produce upon being drafted like Randle is. It shows us exactly why the Lakers have rarely been in the draft lottery; great draft choices is the key to success.

1979 is ancient history for NBA standards, but Randle is still a top prospect and a very talented, very young player. And it helps that all reports point to him not being a headcase, and being a hard working, coach-able player who leaves everything on the court. At worst, Randle could be just a rotation player; a guy who scores but can't play defense. I think he has a pretty high ceiling that he probably won't reach, but he could still realistically become a more athletic version of David Lee (6'9'', 240 pounds, 7 foot wingspan), which is good offense, good rebounder, but needs protection in the back because of his sup-par rim protecting. 20-10 seasons certainly is something Randle should strive for, and I do think he could produce close to a double-double per game in his rookie season, if given starter minutes. There's a lot to like about Randle, and there are some concerning things about him. As it is, I am excited and cautiously optimistic about him going forward.